Torleif Elgvin
1Q/4QMysteries (1Q27/4Q299/4Q300, perhaps 4Q301) demonstrate an
anthological use of texts from the Bible. Parts of biblical verses are alluded
to or freely integrated in the running text without quotation formulas (a
technique known from Qohelet and 4QInstruction). We encounter an implicit
exegesis combined with a strong spiritual self-consciousness of the writer(s)
in question. Biblical expressions belong to the thesaurus of this author, but
he uses them according to his own likings, at times totally disregarding the
original context. In some cases it is difficult to decide whether this reuse of
biblical terms is deliberate or not.
I will
first analyze the use of scriptures in two passages, and then survey the use of
various biblical books in other passages.
Exegesis of Isaiah 47
1Q27 1 i 2-10 is the largest preserved passage in Mysteries, represented
in also in 4Q299 and 4Q300
2 [that they should discern between good
and evil, falsehood and t]ruth. 2 But only mysteries of evil
did they heed [..3.. all ]their wisdom. They do not know the
mystery that is coming, and do not consider deeds of ages past. They do not 4
know what will befall them, and do not save themselves from the mystery that is
coming.
5 And this shall be to you the sign that it is
going to happen: when the (astral) constellations of unrighteousness are
closed, wickedness will be disappear before justice, as darkness disappears
before 6 light - just as smoke vanishes and no longer exists - so
shall wickedness vanish forever. And justice will be revealed like the sun
which regulates 7 the world. And all those who support ’wonderful
mysteries’ will be no more. Knowledge shall fill the world, and folly shall
nevermore be there. 8 The thing is certain to come, and the oracle
is true … 10 What people would wish to be oppressed by a more
powerful one? … (underline:
4Q300 3 2).
Line 2 (4Q300 3 2) ”that they should discern
between g[ood and evil” refers to Genesis 2–3 (2:9, 17; 3:22). According to
this line, the Creator gave these people the option of true discernment. They
sought only evil mysteries – similar to man’s sin in Genesis 3 they sought
other solutions. As ’evil mysteries’ follow closely after the reference to
knowing good and evil from Genesis 2–3, this term probably refers to the
Enochic tradition of the Watchers’ bringing evil to mankind (cf. the ’eternal
mysteries’ of 1 Enoch 9:6), and is probably identical with the (doubtful
reading) ’wonderful mysteries’ of line 7. Tigchelaar and Lange ascribe
Mysteries to the priestly temple milieu (respectively in the pre-Maccabean
period and around 150 BCE). Most scholars assert a distance between this
Zadokite club and the Enochic counter-club. If Lange and Tigchelaar are right,
we have here a Zadokite reference to the tradition of the fall of the angels.
Alternatively, the ’mysteries of evil’ are Zadokite namecalling of the theology
of the Enochic circle.
Kister has
demonstrated that lines 3-4 closely follow a biblical text, Isa 47:9-14, a prophetic
word of judgement on ignorant Babylon with its astrologers and soothsayers. One
cannot exclude that the biblical text is reapplied on Israelite opponents. Cf.
Isa. 47:11, 13, 14 ”a sudden catastrophe
will befall you that you did not know … They predict…what is to befall you …
and they will not save themselves from the burning fire.” Further, both texts
talk about a wisdom in vain (Isa 47:10).
Mysteries use Isa
43:13 as supportive text: ”Do not remember the former things and do not
consider the deeds of ages past.” The message is: the peoples did not consider
God’s acts in history, as admonished by Isaiah.
Raz nihyeh, the ’mystery to come,’ is used in Mysteries only
here (and it is used twice), where it is a code word for God’s coming
judgement, that is unknown by a group that considered itself wise. This
represents a different use of raz nihyeh
than 4QInstruction, where the recurring raz
nihyeh is a comprehensive term for God’s plan from creation to the end of
times.
Line 6 refers to the
hope of biblical psalms that God will put an end to the ungodly, cf. in
particular Ps 104:35. Kister remarks that the ’wicked ones’ of the biblical
texts are replaced by rishah ’wickedness’
in Mysteries, 4Q215a, and the early ’Ten Pacheka’-prayer.
Line 7 refers to Isa 11:9.
’erets of the biblical text recurs as
tevel in Mysteries. Line 8 uses language from Dtn 13:15/17:4 ”if this (evil) thing really has happened among you.” If this is a
conscious allusion, the dtn phrase is used in a radically different sense.
Another parallel, which better fits the context in Mysteries, is Gen 41:32.
The ’word/thing’ and
’oracle’ that will be implemented (line 8), either refers to this passage in
Mysteries, which is seen as a spirit-filled prophecy (so Kister), or it refers
to the judgement on Babylon and its soothsayers in Isaiah 47. The same ch. 13
of Deuteronomy (v. 2) usesd ’ot on a
sign promised by a false prophet, other passages refer to ’ot as an event confirming true prophecy (Exod 3:12; 2 Kgs 19:29;
20:9; Jer 44:29). In Mysteries the ’sign’ is the unfolding of the
eschatological events. One wonders if the author ’found’ the word ’ot in his reading of Deuteronomy 13,
but nevertheless chose to use it in a more positive prophetic sense?
This text from
Mysteries is a sapiential reflection on the lack of true revelation in an
ungodly ’they’-group, gentile or Israelite. The Eden story provides
introductory language, one Isaianic passage is central, two others provide
accompaning phrases. Dtn phrases are used in a radically different sense on
fulfilment of prophetic words on the coming judgement. While the author in other cases uses biblical terms freely and
out of context, recasting them for his own purposes, lines 3-4 represent an
exegesis of Isaiah 47 (and a type of interpretation not found elsewhere in
Mysteries). The oracle which truly will be fulfilled, is therefore most likely
the prophetic word against Babylon in Isaiah 47, alternatively this text as it
is reused in Mysteries. For the author, this biblical oracle has not been fulfilled
– but will be implemented (cf. the postponement in 1QpHab VII 1-8). The writer
may wait for the judgement on the Seleucid empire, the Babylon of his days. The
coming judgement is characterized as raz
nihyeh, while the antagonists claim access to wisdom and raze pele’. Since the Isaianic Book of
Consolation is formative for this writer, he might have expected a renewed
Exodus from Babylon to Zion, cf. 4Q299 frgs. 10 and 13, which talks about
Israel in contrast to and exalted over the nations. Such expectations would be
feasible both in the pre-Maccebean and Hasmonean periods.
4Q299 3a-b and possible use of Qohelet?
2 What shall one call the[ righteous with ]his[ ] and his deed[s ,] 3 when
every deed of the righteous has been defi[led? And what] shall one call a
ma[n who
is] 4 wise and righteous? For [understandi]ng does not belong to
man, [neither hidden wisdom to a woman, except] 5
the wisdom of evil cunning and de[vices of falsehood. 6
a deed which should not be done again, except[
(underline 4Q300 5)
ma’aseh asher lo’
je’asseh, line 6) is a biblical phrase, cf. Gen 20:9 (in plur)
and Isa 19:15.
In a hymnic setting, line 12 of this fragment
conflates phrases from Hab 1:12, Micah 5:1 (on the messianic prince), Exod
15:3, and Isa 42:8.
If my restoration
of ’ishah ’wom]an’ in line 4 is correct (he is preserved as the last letter of this word), this large
fragment contains a sapiential reflection on the nature of man and woman (not
particularly feministic). The reference to the evil cunning of the woman may be
inspired both by Genesis 3 and Dame Folly in Proverbs 1–9 (cf. also Sir
25:13-26:12; 42:9-14). The following lines refer to man’s obedience to the
commands of his creator, and God’s preordination of the ways of men, peoples
and creatures. Lines 6-9 describe two different Israelite groups: those who
hold fast to the true teaching, and those who violate the commands of the
Creator and will be erased from the mouths of the righteous or angels. Such
characteristics better fit Israelite opponents than gentile ones (pace Tigchelaar and Kister, who see
Mysteries as a rhetoric piece only against gentile astrologers).
The DJD notes to line
3 refer to Qohelet 8:14; those to line 4 to Qoh 9:1. Lines 3-4 hardly allude to
words from Qohelet, phrases such as hakam
and tsadiq are common also in Proverbs. In 4Q299 64 3 DJD erroneously reads Qohelet’s key word hevel. The correct reading is tevel wekol. Lange has suggested that
1Q27 1 ii 3 ]mah hu hayoter le[
quotes from Qohelet 6:8, 11, which are unique in their use of the same
expression mah yoter le, cf. also Qoh
7:11. In this case Mysteries may
allude to Qohelet, but the evidence is not conclusive. If Mysteries is dated to
c.200 BCE, there would be a time-gap
of only fifty years between these two books, and they may share the same
linguistic milieu.
We now turn to a short review of the use of specific
biblical books in various fragments. First the Pentateuch. We have already
reviewed the use of Genesis 2–3 in 1Q27 1 i. In Gen 6:5; 8:21, man’s yetser lev is evil. In 4Q299 8 it is a
positive factor: ”discernment, the
inclination of [ou]r heart. With great intelligence He opened our ear, so that
we would h[ear”.
4Q299 60 4 wekol
malke ami[m is borrowed from Gen 17:16, on Sarah as ancestor of kings of
peoples.
1Q27 6 2-3, yekapper
al shegagah is a phrase borrowed from Lev 5:18. mishpatim tsadiqim ’right statutes’ (Deut 4:8 ) – recur in 4Q299
55, a passage on priestly service.
For 4Q299 60 3 am]
segulah mikol [heamim, cf. Exod 19:5; Deut 7:6; 14:2.
4Q301 1 may preserve the opening of this scroll, which, according to
Tigchelaar, may represent another recension of Mysteries.
Line 1, ”Listen, sons, and I will sh]are out my
spirit, and portion out my words to you according to your kinds” clearly
alludes to Prov 1:23, a speech by Lady Wisdom. The author introduces himself in the same way as does Lady Wisdom. Such
an opening of a composition testifies to a self-conscious sapiential teacher.
Schiffman (DJD) and Lange assert that Mysteries refer
to Daniel 9:22-24, and perhaps to the vision of Nebukadnezzar in Daniel ch. 2
as well. Lange therefore dates
Mysteries to ca 150.
4Q300 1b 2 ”]your folly, for sealed from you is the [s]eal of the
vision, and you have not gazed the eternal mysteries, and you have not come to
understand knowledge,” may refer to Dan 9:24/9:22.
Cf. Dan 9:24 ”seventy weeks are decreed … to seal up
vision and prophecy (welachtom chazon
wenabi’) and to anoint the most holy”; Dan 9:22 ”I have now come to give you, Daniel, insight and
understanding” (lehaskilka binah)
One cannot exclude that Mysteries play with Daniel 2
and 9, and borrowed the expression ’seal a vision’ from Daniel. Alternatively,
the line of dependence could be the other way around, from Mysteries to Daniel.
But the similarities are not close enough to talk about a clear-cut quotation
or allusion. Mysteries discuss magicians who do not have access to true divine
wisdom. Different from Daniel 2 and 9 there is no eschatological scenario
described in the preserved text of this passage. Further, different from
Mysteries, in Dan 9:20-27 there is no antagonistic group who lack understanding
Hymnic passages
Similar to 4QBarkiNafshi, biblical hymnic material is used to create new
hymnic texts. But also terms from non-hymnic parts of the Scriptures are freely
reused into an hymnic context, as in the text below.
4Q299 5
1 the lighten]ing stars for the re[membrance of
[His] name[
2 migh]thy mysteries of light and the ways of
dark[ness
3 from the a]byss, the seasons of warmth and the
period[s of ingathering
4 the coming in of day] and the going out of
night[
5 ]and the Zodiac sign[
In line 3, restore me’a]badon.
The third preserved letter is waw,
not yod (DJD).
As noted by Schiffman in DJD, line 1 leziqaron shemo conflates words from Mal 3:16 in a hymnic
description of the heavenly lights and the changes of days and seasons. Line 2
uses darke choshek, an ethical term
from Prov 2:13, in the description of the turning of day and night (we note
that this dualistic author did not use darke choshek for the forces of
evil, which would have been closer to the use in Proverbs 2). The order of the
heavenly lights with the days and seasons (cf. Gen 1:14-18; 8:22) is praised as
a remembrance of the Creator, similar to Ps 19:1-7 and later sectarian psalms.
1Q27 9- 10 3 shim’u malke amim may allude to Ps 2, cf. Ps 110:5-6. For
4Q299 9 3 me]lek nikbad wehadar malkuto
male’[ ’arets, cf. Ps 145:12; Isa 6:3. All three texts refer
to God’s kingship and his glory, as do the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice.
In 4Q301 5 4 ’o]r gadol wenikba[d hua’, the phrase ’or gadol (Isa 9:1, from the messianic passage 9:1-6) is connected to God’s
heavenly temple. This represents a dramatic and conscious reuse of the biblical
phrase. The vision of God’s bright glory in the temple in Isaiah 6 may explain
this reuse of Isaiah 9. We note that Mysteries twice reuse terms from texts
deling with the messianic prince (Micah 5:1, Isa 9:1) in hymnic praise of God.
Ps 99:3 gadol
wenora’ qadosh hu’ provides background for 4Q301 3, where all three epitets
recur in lines 4-6: wenehada[r ]h[u’ah
berov qo]dsho … wenora’ huah … wegado]l hua’h
In Mysteries we do not encounter a kabbalistic-like
view of the hidden meanings of the biblical word, neither a pesher-like
attitude (what the scriptures really talk about). In many passages we encounter
a self-conscious writer (or writers) who deliberately plays with biblical
phrases, reusing them in new contexts. A number of pentateuchal phrases are
conflated into the text. Among the prophets Isaiah is the main source, but also
Micha and Malachi are played upon. The author(s) further digs his wells both in
Davidic and Solomonic soil; both Psalms and Proverbs are consciously used.
Clear references to Qohelet or Sirach cannot be shown, but dependence on
Qohelet is possible. Similar to the writings of the Yahad, Prophets and Psalms
are not inferior to the Torah. The only text which is used as some sort of ’inspired
text’, is a chapter from Isaiah. Allusions to a book does not necessarily mean
that it seen as authoritative. But the same technique is used with texts from
the Torah and the prophets as with texts from Psalms and Proverbs. So at least
these two among the Ketubim are seen as authoritative works at this time,
perhaps around 200BCE. The same passage that uses Isaiah knows the Enochic
tradition of the fall of the angels, either accepting it or polemizing against
Enochic circles.
Mysteries is a composite
work, much more so than Qohelet or 4QInstruction: we find wisdom instructions
and wisdom sayings, riddles, rhetorical dialogues, eschatological outlooks,
hymnic and hekhalot-like passages, references to priestly service, reflections
on creation and the ways of men. It is hard to imagine a unity of argument in
the book as a whole. It is rather an edited collection of originally
independent material. This fits well with Tigchelaar’s assertion that 4Q301
probably reflects another recension of the same book.
The polemic against hartumim suggest a contrast between
gentile magicians and true Israelite sages. Kister suggests that Moses and
Aaron are the fictious sages opposing Egyptian magicians, and sees both
Mysteries and its ‘cousin’ 4QInstruction as sectarian compositions. In my view,
it stands more to reason that the hartumim are used as types for
Israelite opponents. Tigchelaar and I see the references to (tumult of )
gentile nations, oppressors, and to the people of Israel in opposition to the
gentiles, as reflecting the pre-Maccabean period and Seleucid-Ptolemaic wars.
Differences both in theology and
terminology suggest that Mysteries is either earlier than 4QInstruction or
independent of it: in Mysteries we encounter a different use of raz and raz nihyeh, more
nationalistic tendencies, and no elect group within Israel. On the other hand
there are a number of thematical and terminological parallels between these two
writings. Similarities and differences are most easily explained if
4QInstruction is dependent either upon Mysteries or some of its sources.
The hekhalot-style
praises included in Mysteries (especially in 4Q301) may point to the
pre-Maccabean temple as the likely milieu of origin of this tradition together
with the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and hymns such as 11QPsaCreat.
A location of Mysteries in the pre-Maccabean temple might explain how
liturgical traditions with terminological and thematic parallels find their way
both into the Yahad, synagogue
liturgy and hekhalot meditation.
Bibliography:
A. Lange, “In
Diskussion mit dem Tempel. Zur Auseinandersetzung zwischen Kohelet und
Weisheitlichen Kreisen am Jerusalemer Tempel,” Qohelet in the Context of
Wisdom (BETL 136), A. Schoors, ed.; Leuven 1998, 113-59.
E.J.C. Tigchelaar, “Your Wisdom and Your Folly: The Case of
1-4QMysteries,” Wisdom and Apocalypticism
in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Biblical Tradition (BETL 168, F. García
Martínez, ed.), Leuven 2003, 69-88.
Feedback welcome: torleif.elgvin@normisjon.no