Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible: Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum (Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies)

Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible

P R O P H E C Y

IN

T H E

H E B R E W

BIBLE

BRILL'S READERS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES

V O L U M E

5

PROPHECY IN THE HEBREW BIBLE Selected Studies from Vetus Testamentum

COMPILED BY

D A V I D

E.

O R T O N

' / 6 8 ‫' ל־‬

B R I L L LEIDEN

· B O S T O N

2000

· K Ö L N

This book is printed on acid-frce paper.

Cover design:

BEELDVORM,

Lcidschendam

Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme Prophecy in the H e b r e w Bible: selected studies from Vetus Testamentum / comp, by David E. Orton. - Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill, 1999 (Brill's r e a d e r s in biblical studies ; Vol. 5)) ISBN 9 0 - 0 4 - 1 1 1 6 0 - 3

Brill's r e a d e r s in biblical studies. - Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill [Neue Schriftenreihe]

Library of C o n g r e s s Cataloging-in-Publication Data Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data is also available

ISSN ISBN

1389-1170 90 04 11160 3

© Copyright 2000 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS

C O N T E N T S

Preface Places of Original Publication Orthodoxy and the Prophetic Word A Study in the Relationship between Jeremiah and Deuteronomy R. Davidson

vii ix

1

The Special Form- and Traditio-historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecy W. Zimmerli

11

Micah in Dispute with the Pseudoprophets A.S. van der Woude

24

Amos' Intercessory Formula W. Brueggemann

41

The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel R.P. Carroll

56

2 Kings III and Genres of Prophetic Narrative B.O. Long

72

Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature M. Weinfeld

84

From Early to Classical Prophecy: Continuity and Change M. Haran

102

The Purpose of the "Editorial Framework" of the Book of Haggai R A . Mason

115

Possession Trance and Prophecy in Pre-exilic Israel S.B. Parker

124

Poetic Structure and Prophetic Rhetoric in Hosea J.R. Lundbom

139

The Prophecies of Isaiah and the Fall of Jerusalem R.E. Clements

148

The Main Concern of Second Isaiah A.S. Kapelrud

164

Reflections on the Study of the Prophetic Discourse The Question of Isaiah i.2-20 Y. Gitay

173

Zechariah's Visions: A Theological Perspective D.L. Petersen

188

Prophetic Legitimation in Jeremiah J.L. Berquist

200

1 Kings XIII: True and False Prophecy D.W. Van Winkle

211

Structure, Genre and Intent in the Book of Habakkuk M.A. Sweeney

224

Official Attitudes toward Prophecy at Mari and in Israel S.B. Parker

245

Index of Authors

265

Index of Biblical References

271

PREFACE Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible is the first collection of articles from the pages of Vetus Testamentum to appear in the new series of Brill's Readers in Biblical Studies. The series, which began successfully with a number of selections from Novum Testamentum, is designed to provide convenient and useful selections in a handy format, affordable for classroom use and by individual students of the Bible. The present volume presents a broad range of scholarly insights into biblical prophecy published in the last third of the twentieth century. In this period Vetus Testamentum has published several hundred articles on the prophetic books of the Bible. The majority of these have been exegetical readings of individual texts. The focus of this selection, however, is on the broader picture—the nature of biblical prophecy in the cultural context of the ancient Near East, the issue of true and false prophecy in biblical perspective, the genres of the prophetic texts, and central features of the main prophetic books. Readers will recognize many of the authors in this volume as household names in biblical scholarship. The hope is, therefore, that this collection will prove genuinely useful to students of biblical prophecy. In accordance with the ethos of Vetus Testamentum, no editorial comment is made on the articles published here, except, by implication, with regard to their suitability for republication in this form. The arti‫״‬ cle by F. van Dijk-Hemmes, "The Metaphorization of Women in Prophetic Speech: an Analysis of Ezekiel xxiii" (VT 43 [1993] 162ff.) is not included because of its recent reprinting elsewhere. The articles are arranged in chronological order of appearance in the journal. Thanks are due to Arie van der Kooij, current editor of Vetus Testamentum, for his friendly advice. Students and scholars interested in the treasury of studies of particular prophetic texts, and in articles in German and French, which could not be included here, are referred to Vetus Testamentum itself. The Index to Volumes I-XLV published in 1996 is useful for this purpose. DEO

Leiden, August 1999

PLACES O F O R I G I N A L PUBLICATION The articles in this collection first appeared in Vetus Testamentum. R. Davidson, 'Orthodoxy and the Prophetic Word. A study in the Relationship between Jeremiah and Deuteronomy' VT 14 (1964), pp. 407-16 W. Zimmerli, 'The Special Form- and Traditio-historical Character of Ezekiel's Prophecy' VT 15 (1965), pp. 515-27 A.S. van der Woude, 'Micah in Dispute with the Pseudoprophets' VT 19 (1969), pp. 244-60 W. Brueggemann, 'Amos' Intercessory Formula' VT 19 (1969), pp. 385-99 R.P. Carroll, 'The Elijah-Elisha Sagas: Some Remarks on Prophetic Succession in Ancient Israel' VT 19 (1969), pp. 400-15 B.O. Long, '2 Kings III and Genres of Prophetic Narrative' VT 23 (1973), pp. 337-48 M. Weinfeld, Ancient Near Eastern Patterns in Prophetic Literature' F T 27 (1977), pp. 178-95 M. Haran, 'From Early to Classical Prophecy: Continuity and Change' VT 27 (1977), pp. 385-97 R.A. Mason, 'The Purpose of the "Editorial Framework" of the Book of Haggai' VT 27 (1977), pp. 413-21 S.B. Parker, 'Possession Trance and Prophecy in Pre-exilic Israel' VT 28 (1978), pp. 271-85 J.R. Lundbom, 'Poetic Structure and Prophetic Rhetoric in Hosea' VT 29 (1979), pp. 300-308 R.E. Clements, 'The Prophecies of Isaiah and the Fall of Jerusalem' VT 30 (1980), pp. 421-36 A.S. Kapelrud, 'The Main Concern of Second Isaiah' VT 32 (1982), pp. 50-58 Y. Gitay, 'Reflections on the Study of the Prophetic Discourse. The Question of Isaiah i.2-20' VT 33 (1983), pp. 207-21

D.L. Petersen, 'Zechariah's Visions: A Theological Perspective' VT 34 (1984), pp. 195-206 J.L. Berquist, 'Prophetic Legitimation in Jeremiah' VT 39 (1989), pp. 129-39 D.W. Van Winkle, '1 Kings XIII: True and False Prophecy' I T 39 (1989), pp. 31-43 M.A. Sweeney, 'Structure, Genre and Intent in the Book of Habakkuk' I T 41 (1991), pp. 63-83 S.B. Parker, 'Official Attitudes toward Prophecy at Mari and in Israel' I T 43 (1993), pp. 50-58

O R T H O D O X Y

A N D

T H E

P R O P H E T I C

A STUDY IN T H E RELATIONSHIP B E T W E E N J E R E M I A H

AND

W O R D DEUTERONOMY

BY

R. D A V I D S O N St. Andrews

If many aspects of prophecy in Ancient Israel cannot be understood except against the background of parallel phenomena in the world of the Ancient Near East and beyond 1 ), so within Israel — as recent research has increasingly emphasized — prophecy is but one strand, albeit a very important strand, in the total religious life of the community. Much attention has therefore been given to the prophets in relationship, for example, to the cult, to the Psalms, to tradition and to the wisdom literature 2). The purpose of this paper is to explore another avenue in the same general area. Can we analyse the relationship between the prophetic message and what was generally accepted as orthodox religious tradition? A deceptively simple answer to this question has had wide currency.What we have described as 'orthodox religious tradition' was in fact a crude mixture of animism, polytheism and amoral Canaanite religious customs and beliefs. The turning point came with the prophets of the 8th century B. C. who first insisted that Yahweh was not merely the god of Israel but the moral sovereign of the entire universe. It was the prophets from Amos onwards who created and defended Hebrew orthodoxy mid a sea of near paganism 3). This is a dangerous oversimplification of the history of the religion The Prophetic Achievement, 1 9 6 3 pp. 2FF. Prophecy in Ancient Israel, 1 9 6 2 pp. 1 - 4 6 . A . H A L D A R : Associations of Cultic Prophets among the Ancient Semites 1 9 4 5 2 ) A . R . J O H N S O N : The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel 1 9 4 4 . N. W. P O R T E O U S : 'The Prophets and the Problem of Continuity' in Israel's Prophetic Heritage (ed. B . W. A N D E R S O N and W. H A R R E L S O N ) 1 9 6 2 pp. 1 1 - 2 5 . S. T E R R I E N : 'Amos and Wisdom' ibid., pp. 1 0 8 - 1 1 5 . J . L I N D B L O M : 'Wisdom in the Old Testament Prophets' in S. V. T. ILL 1 9 5 5 1

) C. F. WHITLEY:

J . LINDBLOM:

pp.

192FF.

R . H . P F E I F F E R : Religion in the Old Testament 1 9 6 1 pp. 123FF., cf C . F . W H I T L E Y op. cit. p. 43, . . . the great creative prophets were but little indebted to traditional Israelite belief for the content of their message'. 3

)

of Israel. For one thing, we must take far more seriously than this view allows the existence within Israel of a living tradition of faith rooted in the Exodus and covenant, a tradition which preceded the prophets and shaped their message. The prophets were the guardians and interpreters of this tradition not its creators 1 ). Attempts to reverse on theological grounds the traditional Old Testament order, Torah followed by the Prophets, are mistaken. Even if the present literary redaction of Torah is later than certain of the prophetic books, the essential content of Torah predates the prophets 2). Jewish tradition has correctly envisaged the prophetic books as commentary on Torah 3). In the second place it is obviously unsatisfactory to see the religion of Israel at any particular moment solely through the eyes of a prophet in revolt against certain features of that religion. It may be an interesting study to attempt to reconstruct the popular religious mood of the day from the criticisms which Amos directs against it, but the resultant picture is inevitably in certain respects a caricature. T o explore adequately the relationship between the word of Yahweh as it came to the prophet and the religious orthodoxy of the day, two conditions must be fulfilled. 1. There must be a prophet locked in conflict with the religious establishment and providing us with sufficient information to sketch clearly the major issues at stake. 2. We must have access to the orthodox standpoint independent of that provided by the prophetic criticism. In view of the sketchy information we have concerning most of the prophets and the continuing difficulty of dating the literary traditions in the Old Testament, these conditions are not easily satisfied. Jeremiah, however, would seem to fulfil our requirements. We know more of the personal life of Jeremiah than of any other prophet in the Old Testament. Not only are we reasonably well provided with biographical material concerning key incidents in his 1 ) J. M U I L E N B U R G : 'The Form and Structure of the Covenantal Formulations', V.T. 9, 1959 pp. 35Iff. N. W. P 0 R T E 0 U S : 'The Basis of the Ethical Teaching of the Prophets' in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (ed. H . H . R O W L E Y ) , 1 9 5 0 pp. 1 4 3 - 1 5 6 . 2 ) cf D. N. F R E E D M A N : 'Law and Prophets' in S.V.T. I X , pp 250-265 for the view that the literary redactions of Law and Prophets went hand in hand during the crisis years of exile. 3 ) cf. A . C . W E L C H : Deuteronomy, the Framework of the Code 1932 p. 25.

ministry, thanks to Baruch 1 ), not only has he left us his considered verdict on the political and religious establishment, priests and prophets, kings and politicians 2) ; his 'Confessions' or 'Intimate Papers' throw an intensely personal light on an inner crisis provoked by persistent opposition 3 ). The theological presuppositions of the orthodoxy which opposed Jeremiah are equally well documented in Deuteronomy. Whatever the origin of Deuteronomy — and its roots are probably to be traced to Mosaic tradition in certain religious (? Levitical) circles in north Israel 4) — there is little doubt that the Deuteronomic Code provided the theological impetus for the national religious reformation of 621 B. C., a few years after Jeremiah began his prophetic ministry 5). N o r was that impetus misguided. Deuteronomy is one of the most stimulating theological documents in the Old Testament. T o the mystery of God's unmeritable outgoing love Israel's existence as the covenant people is traced. To such a love the people are challenged to respond in love, a love which can only adequately express itself in an exclusive loyalty to Yahweh 6). Israel is 'holy', chosen by Yahweh ; a nation for whom obedience to the ordinances of Yahweh brings well-being and security, disobedience the destructive curse of Yahweh 7). Deuteronomy is written in the conviction that however much Israel may fail, obedience is her true destiny. Anything, therefore, which threatens to undermine this obedience must be ruthlessly eradicated from the community. In particular a reiterated warning

1

) e.g. xxvi-xxix; xxii-xxxix. ) ii 8; ν 30-31; vi 13-15; viii 8-12; xiv 13-16; xxii 13-19; xxiii 9-33; xxviii 5ff. 3 ) xi 18; xii 6; xv 10-21; xvii 9-10; 14-18; xviii 18-23; xx 7-18. 4 ) G. VON RAD: Deuteronomiam-Sttidien 1948 (Ε. T. Studies in Deuteronomy 2

S.B.T.

9)

Interpreter's Bible Vol 2 . 1 9 5 3 . pp. 323FF. Peake's Commentary (ed. M . B L A C K and H . H . R O W L E Y ) 1962 §§ 231 c-e, but per contra Rowley § 69 c. 5 ) Attempts to deny the link between Deuteronomy and Josiah's reformation, and to doubt the chronological data in Jer. i. 1-3, have not in our view been substantiated c.f. J. P. H Y A T T Interpreter's Bible, Vol 5, 1956, introduction and commentary on Jeremiah pp. 777ff. For a sound survey of the issues c.f. H. H. R O W L E Y , 'The Prophet Jeremiah and the Book of Deuteronomy' in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy (ed. H . H . R O W L E Y ) 1950 pp. 157ff. ; reprinted with additional bibliography in From Moses toQumran 1963 pp. 187-210. A. J E P S E N : 'Die Reform des Josia' in Festschrift Friedrich Baumgärtel 1959 pp. 97-108 β ) Deut, vi 4-9; χ 12-13; xi 1. 7 ) Deut, vii 6-11; vii 12ff; xi 13-32; xxviii. G. E. WRIGHT: G . HENTON

DAVIES:

is given against the corruptive influence of Canaanite social and religious customs 1 ). It is in this context that two passages in Deuteronomy, xiii 1-6 and xviii 15-22 seek to legislate for prophecy. Significantly these are the only two passages in Torah which profess to give guidance on one of the burning issues of Jeremiah's ministry, how to distinguish between the true and the false in prophecy; Jeremiah's 'Thus says the L O R D ' being answered by other prophets declaring with equal conviction 'Thus says the L O R D ' and a message which was the direct antithesis of Jeremiah's word 2). (a) xiii 1-6 True to its central thesis, the necessity for exclusive loyalty to Yahweh, Deuteronomy here declares that any 'prophet (‫ )נביא‬or 'dreamer of dreams'(‫ )חלם חלום‬who seeks to seduce the people from their allegiance to Yahweh must be disregarded, no matter what his credentials. Even when he authenticates his message by 'sign and wonder' (‫ )האות והמופת‬he is still in 'rebellion against Yahweh your God' (‫)דבר סרה על יהוה אלהיכם‬. Since all must betraced to the direct causation of God it can only be assumed that such a prophet has been sent to test the people 'to know whether you love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul' v.4. (b) xviii 15-22 seems to recognise that the test proposed in xiii 1-6 may have only limited value. A prophet advocating open apostacy from Yahweh was likely to be a rare phenomenon. In contrast to the devious magical and occult methods which other nations employ to determine the mind of God (xviii 9-14) Israel, claims this passage, will have from age to age a succession of prophets mediating to the community the word of God as Moses had done at Mt. Horeb 3). But what guarantee does the community have that when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh he is not 'speaking presumptuously' (‫?)יזית ל ד ב ר דבר‬ The answer lies in a purely pragmatic test, 'when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which Yahweh has not spoken; the prophet has spoken presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him' v. 22 4). 1

) Deut, vii 1-5; xii 2-3, 29-31; xiii 6-18; xviii 9-14; xx 10-18. 'Die falschen Propheten, ‫ י‬ZAW, 5 1 , 1 9 3 3 pp. 109FF. G . Q U E L L : 'Wahre und falsche Propheten' BF Ch. Th. 4 6 i. 1 9 5 2 J. S K I N N E R Prophecy and Religion 1922 pp. 187-200. 3 ) The arguments adduced by S. R . D R I V E R in Deuteronomy (I.C.C. Commen2

) G . VON R A D :

tary ad loc) for this interpretation of the Mosaic ‫ נביא מקרבך מאחיך כמוני‬are still decisive. 4

J.

) cf. J .

S K I N N E R op.

LINDBLOM,

cit.

ρ

173η,

pp.

198f.

Prophecy in Ancient Israel pp. 213f.

S K I N N E R ' S verdict on these two Deuteronomic passages is interesting. 'The authors of the Deuteronomic legislation were thus aware of the dangers involved in the unrestrained exercise of freedom of prophesying; and in their attempt to regulate it and control it we have the first intimation of the radical opposition between the written code and the living voice of prophecy which ultimately led to the extinction of the latter' 1 ). In fact we may go further. It is our contention that in all probability, 1. the Deuteronomic texts were used by the religious orthodoxy of the day to discredit Jeremiah, to brand him as a 'false' prophet. 2. Jeremiah was driven to criticise the texts as being irrelevant to the developing religious situation of his day. 1. Jeremiah's attitude to the Deuteronomic reformation of 621 B. C. is difficult to determine. Still the likeliest hypothesis is that what began between prophet and reformers as a marriage of like minds, or at least convenience, led through increasingly mutual incompatability to divorce 2). Whatever the history of that relationship, Jeremiah after 621 B. C. found himself speaking to a reformed community, a community pledged to a religious loyalty as outlined in Deuteronomy. Such a loyalty involved a measure of religious apartheid; it enshrined 'the triumphant spirit of a people who will have safety in the land if they keep the covenant because it is God who will fight for them and protect them from all their enemies' 3). That much of Jeremiah's teaching post 621 B. C. is inimical to this spirit has long been recognised. His letter to the exiles (xxix) is a good illustration 4). To counteract the activity of certain revolutionary prophets, encouraging the exiles of 597 B. C. to adopt a policy of non-cooperation towards the Babylonian authorities, out of a conviction that Yahweh would soon crush Babylon and return the exiles to Jerusalem, Jeremiah not only urges the exiles to prepare for a stay of several generations (70 years v. 10), but exhorts them to 'seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile and pray to Yahweh on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare' (v. 7). Earlier prophets, for example

1

) J.

2

) cf.

S K I N N E R : op.

cit.

p.

214.

op.cit. 3 ) G . Ε . W R I G H T : op. cit. P . 325b. 4 ) For the critical problems of ch. xxix, problems which do not affect the central assertions of the passage c.f. J . S K I N N E R op. cit. pp. 287ff. P . V O L Z : ΚΑΤ. 10(1928) pp. 267ff; W . R U D O L P H : H.A.T. 12 1958 pp. 166ff. Α. W E I S E R : ATD 21,1955 pp. 257ff. A . C . W E L C H : Jeremiah, his Time and his Work pp. 158ff. H.

H.

ROWLEY:

Amos and Isaiah of Jerusalem 1 ), had thought of foreign powers as the instruments of Yahweh's just chastisement of his people, but Jeremiah here claims far more ; that loyalty to a foreign power which threatens Judah's continuing existence is not inconsistent with loyalty toYahweh. In the light of the Deuteronomic ideas of a reforme national religion this is heresy. It is as if Deuteronomy, instead of advocating the destruction of the Canaanites and all their ways, had demanded that the Hebrews pray for the welfare of their Canaanite neighbours. N o r was this for Jeremiah a passing mood. A few years later when the leaders of church and state were summoning the people of Jerusalem to a last defiant stand against the Babylonians in the sure confidence that Yahweh would fight for them, Jeremiah pursuing a lonely path of high treason openly counselled his fellow citizens to desert to the enemy 2). There is no reason to doubt the religious sincerity of the men who opposed Jeremiah on these issues. Viewed in the light of Deut. xiii 1-6 Jeremiah was a false prophet inviting his people to 'go after other gods' (Deut. xiii 3), a politico-religious fifth columnist proclaiming treason against the noblest reformed tradition of his people. Nor does Jeremiah fare any better when we apply to him the yardstick of the other Deuteronomic test (xviii 15-22). At any time prior to the final collapse of Jerusalem in 586 B. C., Jeremiah's witness could have been legitimately dismissed with the words 'Jeremiah has spoken presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him' (Deut. xviii 22) From the earliest of his oracles concerning 'the foe from the north' 3) Jeremiah had repeatedly in the name of Yahweh proclaimed coming disaster 'and the word did not come to pass nor did it come true'. (Deut. xviii 22). The thesis that Jeremiah stood condemned in the light of the orthodox assessment of prophecy helps to explain certain aspects of his ministry. There is the consistent and savage certainty of the opposition to Jeremiah from the religious establishment. There is his total failure in one of the traditional roles of the prophet, that of advisor to the ruling monarch 4). There is the depths of the religious 1

) e.g. Amos iii 11; iv 2-3; Isa. χ 5ff. ) cf. Jer. xxi 1 - 1 0 ; xxiv 8 - 2 2 ; xxxvii 3 - 1 0 , 1 1 - 2 1 ; xxxviii 1 - 2 3 . Attempts by certain scholars e.g. Β . D U H M ( K . H . C . 1 9 0 1 ) and C . H . C O R N I L L ( 1 9 0 5 ) to avoid the obvious meaning of xxi 9 and xxxviii 2 reveal the extent to which the radical nature of Jeremiah's message has not been understood. 3 ) Jer. iv 5-31; v. 15-17; vi 1-5, 22ff. cf. i 14. 4 ) Even when a king such as Zedekiah had more than a passing suspicion that 2

crisis in Jeremiah's own soul, a crisis provoked by the burden of a prophetic word which devout men dismissed as false, but to which Jeremiah had to remain true 1 ). 2. Is there any evidence that Jeremiah, aware that the orthodox tests of prophecy were being used to discredit him, questioned the adequacy or relevance of these tests? (a) In Jer. xxiii 9 ff there is a collection of sayings entitled 'Concerning the prophets (‫ )לנביאים‬in which an editor has assembled criticisms of prophetic orthodoxy which Jeremiah must have voiced on many different occasions 3 ). Verses 13-14 contain an interesting contrast. Prophets of a past age in the old northern Kingdom, says Jeremiah, led the people astray by 'prophesying by Baal' (‫ )הנבאו בבעל‬v. 13. In such a situation the Deuteronomic test (xiii 1-6) would be decisive — they entice the people 'to go after other gods'. But, claims Jeremiah, his prophetic contemporaries in Jerusalem do something equally 'horrible' (‫ — )שערורה‬they practice evil themselves and allow the evil in society to go unchecked (v. 14). This, in Jeremiah's eyes, is as much a betrayal of Yahweh as open apostacy. Deuteronomy, however, has no word to say concerning this situation in the ranks of the prophets. It is tempting to assume that in the pointed contrast of these verses, Jeremiah is drawing attention to the inadequacy of an orthodox definition of false prophecy which met the needs of a past age, but proved irrelevant to the religious situation of his own day. Another statement from this same section is most meaningful as a criticism of Deut. xiii 1-6. The Deuteronomic passages begin by speaking about 'a prophet' (‫ )נביא‬or 'a dreamer of dreams' (‫חלם‬ ‫ )חלום‬in such a way as to assume that they are identical or at least parallel phenomena 3). Certain prophets in Jeremiah's day seem to have accepted dreams unquestioningly as containing authentic revelation (xxiii 25). Jeremiah in what can only be pointed contrast draws a sharp distinction between 'dream' (‫ )חלום‬and the true prophetic ‫( ד ב ר‬xxiii 28). The dream is to the true prophetic word as chaff to the true prophetic word was to be found on the lips of Jeremiah, he. did not follow it in defiance of the politico-religious orthodoxy of the day cf. Jer. xxi 2; xxxvii 2; xxxvii 17ff; xxxviii 17-19, 24ff. 1 ) Jer. XX 7-12. 2 ) cf. J. S K I N N E R op.cit. pp. 190 ff. P . V O L Z op. cit. ad loc; W. R U D O L P H op. cit ad l o c ; A . WEISER 3

op.

cit.

ad

loc.

) The dream as a medium of revelation is well authenticated in Old Testament traditions e.g. Gen. xxviii 12; xxxvii 5; 1 K. iii 5; Dan. vii

wheat; the true prophets word being 'like fire, yes like a a hammer which smashes rock' (xxiii 29), characterised by a moral realism. (b) A similar situation seems evident in the relationship between Jeremiah and the other Deuteronomic passage xviii 15-22. In xxiii 17 Jeremiah accuses the prophets who oppose him of proclaiming a message whose unconditional theme is 'Security (‫ )שלום‬shall be yours . . . no disaster shall befall you'. The tension between Jeremiah and prophetic orthodoxy is dramatically personalised in the conflict between Jeremiah and Hananiah ben Azzur spokesman of the Jerusalem prophets (xxvii-xxviii). In response to an oracle of Hananiah's which uncritically endorsed the patriotic fervour of the day Jeremiah declares 'Amen so may Yahweh do; may he vindicate your prophetic word' (xxviii). The word of the true prophetic tradition, however, has been critical not jingoistic. 'As for the prophet who prophesies 'Security' (‫ )שלום‬when the word of the prophet comes to pass, it shall be known that Yahweh truly sent that prophet' (xxviii 9) Can this statement be anything other than a deliberate echo and criticism of Deut. xviii 22 with its insistence that any prophet whose word is not vindicated by events is a false prophet? Jeremiah narrows the operation of this test to one prophetic category only, to the prophet who encourages in the people a mood of false complacency. The content of the prophetic word at the time of its delivery is the ultimate test of its truth or falsity. Any prophetic word which seems to ignore the essential moral realism of Yahwehism must be considered to be false unless later vindicated by events. To these general considerations we may add several other linguistic parallels which strongly suggest that Jeremiah was well aware of the Deuteronomic tests. (a) Deut. xiii 6 says of the false prophet !‫דבר סרה ע ל יהוד‬. Elsewhere in the Old Testament ‫ סרה‬meaning apostacy is found only in Isa. i 5; xxxi 6; Jer. xxviii 16; xxix 32 1 ). The Isaianic passages refer to the apostacy of the people as a whole. The Jeremiah passages alone refer to prophecy. In xxviii 16 Jeremiah condemns Hananiah ‫כי סרה דברת אל יהוה‬ In xxix 32 judgement is pronounced against Shemeliah in Babylon ‫כי סרה ד ב ר ע ל יהוה‬ 1

) cf. BROWN,

DRIVER,

B R I G G S ad

loc;

KOEHLER-BAUMGARTNER

ad

loc.

In both passages L X X omits the phrase and it has generally been assumed that it is an editorial insertion from the Deuteronomic passage 1 ). In view of the critical problems surrounding the L X X text of Jeremiah 2), however, it is doubtful whether a L X X omission ought to be uncritically followed. In both passages Jeremiah's activity stands to be condemned in the light of Deut. xiii 1-6. Is it not possible that he is accusing the representatives of Deuteronomic orthodoxy of being themselves in that state of ‫ סרה‬against Yahweh of which they are accusing him? (a) Deut. xviii 10 lists various religious practices to which the pagan nations resort in their attempts to find God. Such are pronounced to be ‫ תועבה‬and responsible for Yahweh driving these nations out of Canaan. Jeremiah (xxvii 9) links with the prophets who support the powerful anti-Babylonian lobby of the day, three of the roots which appear in the Deuteronomic list ‫קסם‬, ‫ענן‬, ‫כשף‬. May he not be hinting that such prophets are ‫ תועבה‬to Yahweh and responsible in part for the coming destruction of the Judean state? (c) Deut. xviii 18 describes the character of the true prophet in the following terms ‫ונתתי דברי בפיו ודבר אליהם את כ ל אשר אצוני‬ The closest parallels to this are to be found in the call experience of Jeremiah , ‫״‬ ‫( נתתי דברי בפיך‬i 9) Deuteronomy provides us with the sole attempt in Torah to control prophecy by legislation. It is obvious that there are dangers in granting unlimited licence to anyone prepared to impose upon a credulous people by claiming to speak in the name of Yahweh. The Deuteronomic tests seemed at the time of their formulation both theologically sound and realistic; yet at a later age they support Hananiah against Jeremiah. The reason lies in the very nature of prophecy. Though it builds upon a religious tradition, it speaks a new creative word to each age, a word varying in content and emphasis with the needs of the age. The attempt to legislate for prophecy is, therefore, doomed to failure since it means fossilizing prophecy at a certain stage of its development. Theologically S K I N N E R ' S insight remains true. 'False prophecy. . . so far as it had any root of 1

) cf. P . V 0 L Z op. cit. ad loc.; W . R U D O L P H op. cit. ad loc.; and footnote to B. ad loc. 2 ) cf. J. Z I E G L E R : Septuaginta‫׳‬. Ieremias 1957.

H.

sincerity was fundamentally an unprogressive survival of the ancient prophecy of Israel under conditions to which it was no longer adequate 1). Like false prophecy, orthodoxy, when encased within a written document such as Deuteronomy, runs the danger of negating the truth it seeks to preserve by fossilizing it at a particular stage of its development. It is easier for the false prophet to repeat uncritically orthodox truisms than to face the demand of a creative prophetic word. In this sense the attitude of false prophecy is akin to the attitude of Job's friends, while Jeremiah, like Job, is on pilgrimage away from orthodoxy to a more adequate faith. 1

) op.cit. ρ 187 (italics mine)

T H E

SPECIAL F O R M - A N D C H A R A C T E R

T R A D I T I O - H I S T O R I C A L

O F E Z E K I E L ' S

P R O P H E C Y

BY

W. ZIMMERLI Göttingen

In spite of all the work that has been done on the prophet Ezekiel, his prophecy still remains difficult to comprehend. In the following paper 1 ) we will not presume to illuminate all of those difficulties. Rather, we will take up the more modest task of presenting certain facts about the form and material of Ezekiel's message, and on the basis of these, draw several conclusions about the personal character of this prophet and the background of his traditions. We will proceed in this task from the opinion that even though a complex redactional work can be recognized in the book of Ezekiel, it preserves for us on the whole the peculiar characteristics of the prophet. Thus, the critical work of H Ö L S C H E R , M E S S E L , T O R R E Y , I R W I N , and others appears to me not to do proper justice to the text. When one considers the book of Ezekiel according to its form, he is immediately struck by the consistent recurrence of speeches by the prophet in the first person. Only the superscription in i 3a, which has been secondarily inserted into the text, is in the third person. VON 2 R A B E N A U ) has shown how deeply this structure has penetrated into the substance of the book, so that it can by no means be stripped away as a secondary redactional veil. Of the 52 units which I find in the book, only one can be considered strictly a narrative without a word of proclamation. This is xxxiii 21-22, the account of the arrival of the news that Jerusalem had fallen. Because of the peculiarity of this form, the news of the fall of Jerusalem receives unusually strong emphasis. Five of the units then are accounts of visions 3 ). All of the remaining 1

) Paper read at the Bangor meeting of the society for Old Testament Study, July 22, 1964. 2 ) K. V O N R A B E N A U , "Die Entstehung des Buches Ezechiel in formgeschichtlicher Sicht" (Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Martin-Luther-Universität HalleWittenberg, ges.-spr. wiss. Reihe 5, 1955/56, 569-683). ‫ ף‬i 1 - iii 15; iii 22 - ν 17; viii 1 - xi 25; xxxvii 1-14; xl 1 - xlviii 35.

46 units, with the single exception of the qinab in Chapter xix 1 ), are introduced with the sentence ‫ויהי ד ב ר יהוה אלי‬. This sentence is formally an element of narrative. In many texts in Samuel and Kings 2), we find it in a narrative context, reporting in the third person that the word of Yahweh had confronted a prophet. Apart from secondary superscriptions, the formula does not appear in the earlier classical prophets down to Jeremiah. In Jeremiah it appears again in narrative texts 3). However, it can be seen here that this short sentence, formulated in the third person, is a simple introduction formula of a prophetic speech. This recalls the fact that the prophetic word does not express a timeless knowledge of Yahweh but is in fact an event, an intrusion of divine reality into the prophet's life. Along with the narrative formula in the third person, the first person formulation of the sentence is also found in Jeremiah 4). And this is the form which appears exclusively in Ezekiel. By means of this personal account, Ezekiel subordinates everything else to the intrusion of the divine word and vision. And in light of this, all else recedes into the background. Thus we learn nothing of a circle of disciples such as we do in Isaiah, although the book of Ezekiel clearly betrays the work of a group of students who were responsible for handing his prophecy down to subsequent generations. Neither do we know of a figure which would correspond to Jeremiah's Baruch. The message in this prophet is dominated completely by the event of the divine word to which he refers in the first person. This strong accent of personal encouter with the word of Yahweh might well allow us to presume that Ezekiel goes his own original way and finds original forms for his proclamation. But such is not the case. In reality, his proclamation shows a completely different picture. We discover first a clear line which leads back from Ezekiel to the manner of expression and the world of ideas of pre-classical prophecy. This is best shown in the visions. All five are introduced by the stereotyped expression: "the hand of Yahweh came (‫ )היה‬or fell (‫ )נפל‬over me". The phrase "the hand of Yahweh" appears only once in Isaiah (viii 11) and once in Jeremiah (xv 17). But the most common place 1 2

) Cf. my Commentary, p. 420.429. ) Cf. Ο . G R E T H E R , Name und Wort Gottes im Alten Testament,

(1934), 3 4

6 7 ff.

) Jer. i 2; xiv 1; xxviii 12 et al. ) Jer. i 4.11.13; ii 1 et al.

BZAW

64

for it is in the stories of the earlier pre-classical prophets. 2 Kings iii 15 reports that after music had been played, the hand of Yahweh came over the prophet Elisha so that he could deliver an oracle. According to 1 Kings xviii 46, the hand of Yahweh came over Elijah after the divine judgment on Mount Carmel, so that he could run to Jezreel alongside the chariot of Ahab, an inconceivable feat of strength. This leads us next to the expression that the "spirit of Yahweh" seizes the prophet and transplants him into some different state, indeed, translocates him from one place to another. In 2 Kings ii 16, after Elijah had made his ascension, the prophetic disciples express the apprehension that the "spirit of Yahweh" might have lifted Elijah up (‫ )נשא‬and tossed him into some mountain or into some valley. On the other hand, we find in 2 Kings ν 26 an inner translocation which allows the prophet to see things which occur at a great distance. Elisha perceives from his remote vantage point the fact that Gahazi had accepted a gift from Naaman against his command. He describes this with these words: "Did my heart not go along (‫ )לבי הלך‬when a man descended from his chariot and met you?" It is even more conspicuous that the classical prophets before Ezekiel avoided the expression of the prophetic ‫רוח‬. It seems that these prophets wanted consciously to disassociate themselves from the "spirit" character of the older prophets which could be so readily incited to extreme manifestations. In Hosea (ix 7) we hear the people say: " T h e man of the spirit is mad." But in Ezekiel this aversion is completely missing. He stands unconditionally in the old prophetic tradition when he says at the end of his call vision that "the spirit" lifted him up (‫ )נשאתני‬and took him away (‫)ותקחני‬, or when in viii 3 he says concerning his translocation to Jerusalem that a figure seized him by the hair, and the "spirit" lifted him up between heaven and earth (‫ )ותשא אתי רוח‬and brought him in a divine apparition to Jerusalem. Thus, just as Elisha looked into the distance to see Gahazi accept a gift from Naaman, Ezekiel saw what was happening in the Temple. According to xi 24, the spirit lifted him up again (‫)ורוח נשאתני‬ and brought him back to Jerusalem. Also xxxvii 1 reports his translocation ‫ ברוח יהוה‬into a field full of dead bones. Still a further minor feature should be discussed in this context. According to viii 1 ff., the vision of his translocation suddenly falls on the prophet as he sits in his house while the elders of Judah are sitting before him (‫)לפני‬. This stereotyped situation is to be found also in xiv 1 ff. and xx 1 ff. (cf. also xxxiii 31). We seek in vain for

this situation in the books of Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micha, and Jeremiah. But its exact equivalent is found in 2 Kings vi 32, where Elisha is "sitting in his house" and the elders are "sitting with him" (here: ‫)אתו‬. We may conclude, therefore, that we have discovered here a typical scene from the prophetic "Lehrhaus". Its relationship to similar typical scenes in the Egyptian royal novelle 1 ) needs further clarification. At this point, we have established nothing more than a connection between the tradition of Ezekiel and the earlier prophetic ‫רוח‬theology. This leads us next to the essential question of the relationship in content. The phenomenon of dramatic incitation plays an incomparably stronger role in the visions of this prophet than in the earlier classical prophets. Whereas the visions of most of the others show one single picture: locusts, a basket of fruit, an almond rod, the visions of Ezekiel are much more strongly dramatized. The prophet not only feels himself bodily removed and led around in his visions. He himself initiates a part of the action which comprises the visions. Under his prophecy, Pelatiah collapses dead. According to the vision in xxxvii 7, the dead bones come together again and receive new life at his word. Ezekiel's visions contain, to use 2 L I N D B L O M ' S terminology, a strong autodramatic element ) which does not appear in the other major classical prophets. This observation leads us to another group of words which are characteristic for Ezekiel. The older pre-classical prophets already knew the prophetic sign acts. Ahijah of Shilo tore his mantle apart and gave Jereboam ten of the twelve pieces—the ten tribes which Jereboam would receive as the future king 3). Elijah threw his mantle on Elisha, and by this act invested Elisha with the office of prophecy 4 ). F O H R E R has carefully collected all of the material relevant to a study of these acts under the title : Die symbolischen Handlungen der Propheten, 1953. Yet it seems to me that the designation "symbolic act" is nevertheless unsatisfactory because it does not make it clear enough that the prophet wants these acts to represent something more than the symbolic. In his sign (thus, the Old Testament itself speaks of this act), he initiates the beginning of a future event. The 1

) S. H E R R M A N N , "Die Königsnovelle in Ägypten und in Israel" (Wiss. Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, ges.-spr. wiss. Reihe 3 , 1 9 5 3 / 5 4 , 5 1 - 6 2 . 2 ) J . L I N D B L O M , Prophecy in Ancient Israeel, 1 9 6 2 . 3 ) 1 Kings xi 29 ff. 1 Kings xix 19 ff.

coming event is in fact already present in the sign act. This form of proclamation which anticipates future events is also found in the other major prophets, Isaiah goes around for three years naked and barefoot 1 ), Jeremiah carries a yoke around his neck 2 ). F O H R E R counts three such acts in Isaiah. In Jeremiah, there are seven 3 ). But in Ezekiel there are twelve 4), far more than in any of the other prophets. If one examines the formal structure of the accounts of the sign acts in Ezekiel, the most conspicuous aspect which strikes his attention is how rarely the completion of the sign act is expressly narrated. As a rule, only the divine word which calls forth the act is reported. Thus, the accounts of the sign acts often stand in units which are introduced by the formula: ‫ויהי דבר יהיה אלי‬. This shows once again the concentration on the word-event which was established above. These units also illuminate the especially strong autodramatic character of Ezekiel's proclamation which marked his visions. The proclamation shows again and again the strong personal participation of the prophet in that which he proclaims. Or to formulate it the other way around: The event which is proclaimed by the prophet seizes him again and again and makes him a part of the event itself. His person—even his body—participates in the event which his word proclaims. With regard to the content, it is surprising how often Ezekiel's sign acts revolve around the fall of Jerusalem. The supposition that this event has special emphasis because it is reported in the only purely narrative unit in Ezekiel is thus confirmed from another angle. The three sign acts which form the literary basis for Chapter iv^f., describe the event of the siege and fall of the city. The prophet besieges a city which has been drawn on a brick—this is the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem. He eats a rationed amount of food and drinks a rationed portion of water. This is the hunger of the sieged city. He cuts off his hair with his sword, burns a third in fire, cuts up a third with his sword, and scatters a third to the four winds. This is the end of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. He marks two roads with signposts 5). This points to the time before the beginning of the 1

) Is. XX. ) Jer. xxvii f. 3 ) Jer. xiii 1-11; xvi 1-9; xix 1-15; xxvii f.; xxxii 1-15; xl 8-13; 11 59-64. *) Ez. iii 22-27; iv 1-3; iv 4-8; iv 9-11; iv 12-15; ν 1-3; xii 1-16; xii 17-20; xxi 11-12; xxi 23-29; xxiv 15-24; xxxvii 15-28. Concerning all the details of the individual units cf. my Commentary. Ez. xxi 24 ff. 2

siege when Nebuchadnezzar was in the midst of finding his way to Jerusalem. He leaves his house by night with only a small bundle of goods which could be carried by an exile 1 )—this is the deportation of the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The sighing of the prophet in xii 17 ff. gives voice to anxiety over the devastation of the land. According to xxi 11 ff., the groaning of the exiles is attested. And according to xxiv 15 ff. the dumb grief of the prophet over the sudden death of his wife represents the dumb grief of the exiles over the news of the fall of the city and the temple, a grief which is no longer capable of the normal process of mourning. All of these texts show how the prophet saw himself participating in the event of the siege and fall of Jerusalem and the deportation of its inhabitants through acts which were in part consciously executed and in part unconsciously experienced (such as trembling, or mute mourning). With the autodramatic characteristics which recall the phenomenon of rapture associated with the ‫ רוח‬in the older prophets belongs that which is suggested by the introductory formula in vi 11 : "Clap your hands and stamp your feet and say . . . ," or in xxi 19: "You, son of man, prophesy and strike one hand against the other." With these fomenting gestures, Ezekiel proclaims his word. Also the formula which calls for a type of Qibla in the prophetic announcement must be discussed here, a formula which is found eight times in Ezekiel. According to vi 2 ff., the prophet should set his face against the mountains of Israel; in xxi 3, against the forest in the south (which in xxi 7 is interpreted as "Jerusalem"); xxv 2, against Ammon; xxvii 21, against Sidon; xxxv 2, against the mountains of Seir. He is also required to do the same against persons: in xiii 17, against the false prophetesses; xxxv 2, against Pharaoh; xxxviii 2, Gog. In the other classical prophets, this formula is completely missing. But we are reminded here of the Bileam stories where the seer Bileam must first set his face toward the valley where the people of Israel are encamped before he could speak 2). The visual contact of the seer with the addressee of his words is necessary in order for his word to be effective. Thus, we can establish an archaic tendency here which fits into the strong autodramatic character of EzekiePs proclamation. From still another side, we may show that this tendency toward dramatic animation which recalls the ‫ רוח‬- theology of the older prophets represents an essential characteristic of Ezekiel. In one of 1 2

) Ez. xii 1 ff. ) Numb, xxii 41; xxiii 13; xxiv 1 f.

the confessions of Jeremiah, we hear the affirmation of the prophet before G o d : "As often as thy word appeared, I swallowed it, and it became a joy to me" (xv 16). This is doubtlessly a figure of speech in Jeremiah. That God's word is sweeter than honey is also affirmed in Ps. xix 11 as well as Ps. cxix 103. But in the story of the call of Ezekiel, this figure develops into a dramatic reality. The prophet sees the word set before him in the form of a scroll, and he receives the commission to eat it. "So I ate it, and it became in my mouth sweet as honey." In Is. vii 20, one hears in the form of a prophetic threat that Yahweh will shave Judah—the head, and the hair of the feet, and the beard—with a razor which had been hired in the East. Again we are dealing with a figurative expression. Again Ezekiel develops this figurative expression into a dramatic reality, this time in a sign act. For Yahweh commands the prophet to take a sword at that very moment, cut off his hair, and execute judgment on it (v 1). In xxxvii 11, we can hear the sigh of the exiles : " O u r bones are dried up. Our hope is gone. We are lost." The first sentence of this three-fold complaint employs a figurative expression. Prov. xvii 22 says : " A cheerful heart freshens the body, but a downcast spirit dries up the bones." For the third time, this surprising process is to be recognized in Ezekiel. A figure of speech develops into a dramatic event (here in the form of a vision). In his vision xxxvii 1 ff., the prophet sees himself transplanted into a large field of dried bones, and receives the command to awaken them through a prophetic word. This process of developing a figure of speech into reality which without doubt appears at least three times shows the dramatic sensitivity of this prophet with great clarity. We may move on here to a further trait which is characteristic for the form of Ezekiel's proclamation. It is striking how often we find lengthy units in Ezekiel which completely exhaust one particular theme, while no such phenomenon is to be found in the earlier classical prophets. Yet many of the themes which Ezekiel so expounds are borrowed from his predecessors. Thus the message ‫בא הקץ‬ appears in Am. viii 2 by association from the vision of a ‫כלוב קיץ‬. This ‫ בא הקץ‬then forms the text for an exhaustive portrayal of the last days in Ez. vii. It is cited and modified several times in vii 2 ff., 6 ff. In Hosea, the comparison of Israel with an unfaithful wife is to be found. Ez. xvi paints this figure of the unfaithful wife in great breadth for application to Jerusalem, making use of various memories from Jerusalem's history and religion. Jeremiah modifies the theme in iii 6 ff, in which he applies it to both kingdoms of Israel, ad-

dressing Israel with a type of personal name ‫ משבה‬and Judah with ‫)בגדה( בגודה‬. Along these same lines, Ez. xxiii develops the figure of the two faithless sisters, who now receive the names Ohola and Oholiba, and especially emphasizes their Egyptian origin. The principal difference is that here again Ezekiel paints his picture with greater breadth and more drastic phantasy. Cf. further the oracles against the nations, especially against the ship of Tyre and the world tree of Egypt. This broad painting of figures with stark impressions belongs to the peculiar character of Ezekiel's speech. And once again, behind this peculiarity of form, the definite face of the man appears. This picture of the dramatically stimulated sensitivity, of the power of experience, and the capacity for phantasmic visions must not mislead us to suppose that we can see in Ezekiel an introverted mystic who is sunk in the world of his own experiences. In order to guard against this mistake, we must consider a further form of speech which is rather common to Ezekiel—the form of the discussion or disputation. Ezekiel's words often begin with citations from his peers which are quite valuable for our knowledge of his environment. We hear the words of men who cast aside the prophetic word as a word which will not come to pass at all (xii 22), or which can be expected only in the far distant future (xii 27). We hear of cynical mockery (xviii 2), and open accusation against Yahweh (xviii 25, 29 ; xxxiii 17, 20). After the catastrophy, we hear words of self-righteousness from the inhabitants who were left in the land after 597 (xi 15) and then after 587 (xxxiii 24), as well as the arrogance of the neighboring peoples (xxv 3; xxvi 2) and the deep doubt (xxxiii 10; xxxvii 11) and resignation (xx 3) of the exiles. The prophet takes up the discussion with all of these voices, and thereby develops a style of discussion which later becomes dominant in the book of Malachi. But here again we see a characteristic tendency to set both the complaint of the people and the answer of the prophet formally in the oracle of Yahweh. Yahweh himself tells the prophet what the men will think about him and how he should answer them. The citations almost always form a part of the word-event which confronts the prophet. An especially common form of speech is formed in this context by the speeches of accusation in which the prophet is required by Yahweh to judge the people (‫ שפט‬xvi 4; xx 4; xxii 2, sec. xxiii 36), and to make their abominations known to them (‫הודע · · · · את תועבתיה‬ xvi 2; xx 4; xxii 2). The stereotyped manner of formulation creates

the impression that a fixed form of technical accusation, perhaps having its background in the priestly sphere (‫ הודיע‬- ‫ )דעת‬lies before us. This is worth still further formcritical investigation. This leads, however, to a further broad area of tradition in Ezekiel. In Hos. iv 1 and Jer. vii 9, it is seen that a prophet can formulate an accusation against his people by enumerating a series of commandments which his people have transgressed. It is widely recognized that the classical decalogue can be seen in the background of the texts from Hosea and Jeremiah. This phenomenon is also to be found in Ezekiel, but here the series of laws which are set before the people carries a strong priestly color and has a certain resemblance to the formulation of the holiness code. Thus the bloody city of Jerusalem in xxii 6 ff. is characterized by an enumeration of the commandments which it has transgressed. In xviii 5-9 and 14-17 the pattern of the righteous and in 10-13, that of the wicked are marked by a series of enumerations which give the impression of formulas. A fragment of such a series is also to be found in xxxiii 15. xviii 5-9 allows us to go a step further, for here the righteous is characterized by a series of sentences which are then concluded with a completely superfluous ‫צדיק הוא‬. One can recognize here, according to the research of R E N D T O R F F and VON R A D 1 ), a "declaratory formula" which is particularly chatacteristic in priestly terminology. It probably has its Sit% im Leben in the priestly declaration at the temple gate. By means of this formula, the priest expresses his decision at the threshhold of the temple whether a temple visitor will be allowed to enter the sanctuary or not. In Ez. xviii 7, we have the formula ‫חיה יהיה‬, which certainly reflects the speech of the temple, for whoever enters into the temple enters into the spere of life 2). The priestly torah which is cited polemically by Amos suggests a priestly invitation: "Seek Bethel, and thus you will live." (cf. Am. ν 4 ff.). We are therefore within the tradition which is reflected by the entrance Torah, best known to us from Ps. xv and xxiv. Thus Ezekiel develops what he has to say about the new life in the language of the temple liturgy. 1 ) G . VON RAD, ThLZ 76 (1951), 129-132 (=Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament, Theol. Bücherei 8, 1958, 130-135); R . R E N D T O R F F , Die Gesetze in der Priesterschrift, 1954, 74-76. 2 ) G. VON RAD, "Gerechtigkeit" und " L e b e n " in der Kultsprache der Psalmen (Testschr. für A. Bertholet 1950, 418-437=GM. Studien, T h B 8, 1958, 225-247); W. Z 1 M M E R L 1 , " L e b e n " und " T o d " im Buche des Propheten Ezechiel ( T h Z 13, 1957, 494-508=Gottes Offenbarung, T h B 19, 1963, 178-191).

In the context of this priestly speech we may move on to the form of the casuistic sections in the book of Ezekiel. In the book of the covenant, we have a casuistic style in which a conditional sentence is introduced with ‫כי‬. In the style of the priestly casuistic, as we know it in the book of Leviticus, the ‫ כי‬appears regularly in the second position of the sentence, immediately behind the subject. (Cf. Lev. i 2, ‫ ;אדם כי‬ii 1, ‫)נפש כי‬. This very form appears in Ezekiel not only in the description of a righteous man in xviii 5, ‫איש כי יהיה צדיק‬, but also in the casuistic development in the picture of the watchman in iii 19; xxxiii 9: ‫ ;איש כי‬in xxxiii 2: ‫ ;ארץ כי‬xxxiii 6 and xiv 13 ‫הצפה כי‬. In Lev. xvii, a more complete style is found in a series of four regulations. Here the individual commandments are introduced with the heavily accented ‫איש איש מבית ישראל )ומן הגר הגר בתוכם( אשר‬. Exactly this same style can be found twice in the unit Ez. xiv 1-11, which has grown formally out of sacral law. These observations show that Ezekiel was strongly influenced both formally as well as traditionally by priestly language and the traditions of the sanctuary, and confirm the information given to us in i 3 that he was a priest. We must pose still another question in our study of the traditions behind the prophecy of Ezekiel. Recent research has shown very clearly that a strong line of Jerusalem-David traditions stands alongside the "total-Israel" perspective of the Exodus traditions 1 ). This duality of traditions is especially apparent in the prophets. While the prophet of the northern kingdom, Hosea, stands exclusively in the former group of traditions, the proclamation of the Jerusalemite Isaiah is determined decisively by the latter. But when one examines Ezekiel for these traditions, it very readily appears that here the question of alternatives does not apply. Ez. xx shows the full use of the tradition of the election of Israel in the exodus, even though this tradition in Ezekiel is recast in the dark light of a history of sin. Also in the story of the two unfaithful wives in Ez. xxiii, the Egyptian origin of both Israelite kingdoms is strongly emphasized. According to B A C H 2), there is an old tradition which can be recognized behind the motif of the foundling in Ez. xvi which maintains that Yahweh " f o u n d " Israel in the wilderness (cf. Hos. ix 10; Dt. xxxii 10). This story in Chapter xvi, however, is about Jerusalem, whose father was 1

) Cf. for example E. R O H L A N D , Die Bedeutung der Erwählungstraditionen Israels für die Eschatologie der alttestamentlichen Propheten, Diss. Heidelberg, 1956. 2 ) R. B A C H , Die Erwählung Israels in der Wüste (Diss. Bonn, unpublished, 1951).

an Amorite and mother a Hittite (xvi 3). Thus, it appears here polemically in a prophetic accusation. In xl-xlviii, however, the new Jerusalem stands at the center of the hope for salvation, the place to which the new exodus would lead according to xx 32 ff. There on the high mountain of Israel (xx 40), the new pure sacrifice will be offered. The anticipation of a new David is mentioned in xxxiv 23 ff., and in xxxvii 25. Ezekiel appears, therefore, to be a late-comer for whom the ancient salvation traditions are thoroughly entwined. He is also clearly a latecomer among the prophets, for his work presupposes the earlier classical prophets. The ‫ בא הקץ‬in Ez. vii stems from Amos, shaving his head from Isaiah, the proclamation about the adulterous wife from Hosea, the story of the two adulterous wives from Jeremiah, which, as M I L L E R 1 has shown, has influenced Ezekiel in an especially strong measure. But this poses the peculiar problem of tradition in Ezekiel. Ezekiel shows traditio-historical influence from various sides. He lives on the one hand in an archaic world of elements from pre-classical prophecy. Along with this, his themes are strongly influenced by the earlier classical prophets. Seen from this aspect, he seems to be an unoriginal follower, the heir of earlier prophetic proclamation. But then on the other hand, there is a sharp distinction between Ezekiel and the earlier prophets who influenced him. This can be seen more clearly in the field of his theological peculiarity with its unprecedented sharp attack on the sin of his people. Unfortunately time prevents our saying more about the theological character of his message here 2). The peculiarity of Ezekiel's message can also be demonstrated in his vocabulary. For important terms from the proclamation of his predecessors are missing. Thus, this Jerusalemite priest never speaks of Yahweh Sabaoth (also missing in the Ρ narrative) 3) ; he never mentions the love of Yahweh (the verb ‫ אהב‬appears in xvi and xxiii only as a participle which refers to the lovers which Israel, or Jerusalem, takes). ‫חסד‬, which is so important in Hosea and Jeremiah, never appears in Ezekiel. Nothing is said in any form about the fear of God (‫)יראת יהוה‬. Never does he speak of trust in Yahweh. The 1 ) J. W . M I L L E R , Das Verhältnis Jeremias und Hesekiels sprachlich und theologisch untersucht, 1955. 2 ) Cf. for example "Das Gotteswort des Propheten Ezechiel" ( Z T h K 48, 1951, 249-262 = Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 133-147). 3 ) Cf. W. K E S S L E R , " A U S welchen Gründen wird die Bezeichnung , Jahwe Zebaoth' in der späteren Zeit gemieden?" (Wiss. Zeitschr. der Martin-LutherUniversität Halle-Wittenberg, ges.spr. wiss. Reihe 7, 1958, 767-772).

verb ‫ בטח‬appears only twice (xvi 15; xxxiii 13), and both times are colored by negative accents (false confidence). The only text in which we meet the accusative formulation, to know God, which is so dominant in Hosea and Jeremiah, is critically suspect (xxxviii 16 ‫)למען דעת הגרים אתי‬. Ezekiel never speaks of a "plan" (‫ )עצה‬or " w o r k " (‫ )מעשה‬of Yahweh; neither do we find a verb, adjective, or substantive form the stem ‫ צדק‬applied to Yahweh. On the other hand, completely new forms of speech come into the foreground and give his proclamation an unmistakable individuality. So finally, we must briefly sketch out one of these: the socalled Erweiswort which Ezekiel uses in a particularly characteristic way to speak about the knowledge of Yahweh 1 ). With this peculiar form of proclamation, the prophet not only announces a future act of Yahweh but formulates this announcement in a manner which expresses the hidden intention of Yahweh's act. In xxxvii 12 we hear: ‫״‬See, I open your graves and raise you out of your graves (as my people) and bring you into the land of Israel, and you will know (we can also translate : in order that you may know) that I am Yahweh when I open your graves and raise you out of your graves (as my people)". Yahweh acts, and the goal of that action is the creation of knowledge, the knowledge that he is Yahweh. But this is always formulated in the first person. The content of this knowledge is the sentence: ‫אני יהיה‬, "I am Yahweh". We have in this a formula of self-revelation 2) by which Yahweh steps out of his incognito, just as we find it in the preamble of the decalogue or the postscript of the Holiness Code. This form of speech is found in 1 Kings xx 13, 28 in a narrative about the old northern prophets of the ninth century. So once again we meet a relationship in the tradition of Ezekiel to the pre-classical prophets. This formulation, which again is completely missing in the classical prophets before Ezekiel, has central meaning for Ezekiel. I cannot speak further here about the pre-history of this form of speech 3). It is enough simply to have presented something of the peculiar stamp which Ezekiel receives from this formulation, a 1 ) "Das Wort des göttlichen Selbsterweises (Erweiswort), eine prophetische Gattung" (Mélanges Bibliques rédigés en l'honneur de André Robert, 1957, 154-164= Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 120-132). 2 ) "Ich bin Jahwe" (Geschichte und Altes Testament, Festschrift für A. Alt, 1953, 179-209 = Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 11-40). 3 ) "Erkenntnis Gottes nach dein Buche Ezechiel", ATANT 27, 1954 (=Gottes Offenbarung, ThB 19, 1963, 41-119).

stamp which is of decisive importance for our understanding of this prophet. Ezekiel, this prophet of sensitivity, of dramatic personal involvement who is seized by the sudden intrusion of the word of Yahweh, who paints his pictures with the glaring color of extreme phantasy but nevertheless stands in a passion-filled dialogue with his peers, who speaks out of a rich priestly heritage and takes up many themes which have reached him through the earlier traditions of Israel and her prophets, this prophet Ezekiel with all of his characteristics recedes into the background, when one asks about the goal of his proclamation. And in his place appears the one who is revealed by his intrusion, who desires to make the mystery of his person known to the world. We must look back to our beginning. The whole book of Ezekiel is stylized as a report in the first person, not because the prophet wants to emphasize his own experience but because he has been invaded by one who is greater than he. The prophet is the son of man, the creature. "The word of Yahweh came over me". The whole accent in Ezekiel lies on the word of Yahweh. This word he has experienced as a fomenting assault from the Lord which he must then make known to his people and the world—I am Yahweh. All else is entwined with and recedes behind this Yahweh who is revealed in both judgment and grace.

M I C A H

I N

D I S P U T E

W I T H

T H E

P S E U D O - P R O P H E T S

*)

BY

A. S. V A N D E R W O U D E Groningen

In a number of prophetic books we are given an account of heated disputations between the canonical prophet and persons who were also prophets, albeit that they were disqualified as such already in the Septuagint by means of the term ψευδοπροφήται.1) It was held against these pseudo-prophets that they prophesied by Ba'al (Jer. ii 8), that they have not stood in the council of Yahweh (Jer. xxiii 18), that they prophesied lies (Jer. xxvii 14; Zech. xxiii 3) and thereby led God's people astray (Mi. iii 5). In trying to define the motives of these pseudo-prophets, 2 ) we encounter a number of difficulties. Usually they are mentioned only in passing and none of their own writings are known to us. The book of Nahum, in my opinion, is no exception, for it is very unlikely that this book is to be regarded as the words of a nationalistic, professional prophet resembling a figure such as Hananiah, whom Jeremiah opposed. 3 ) Therefore, our only source of information about the pseudo-prophets is an Old Testament tradition, which displays a distinct aversion from them. This means that a measure of distortion * Paper read at the summer meeting of the British Society of Old Testament Study at St. Andrews, Scotland, July 16-19 1968. I am deeply indebted to my friend Dr. C. J. L A B U S C H A G N E (Groningen) for his invaluable assistance in translating this paper. 1 ) Cp. Jer. vi 13; xxxiii (Hebrew text xxvi) 7, 8, 11, 16 etc.; Sach. xiii 2and Ε. J A C O B , 'Quelques remarques sur les faux prophètes', Theologische Zeitschrift Basel xxiii (1957), p. 479. 2 ) G. Q U E L L , Wahre und falsche Propheten, Gütersloh 1 9 5 2 (BFchTh 4 6 , 1 ) ; Ε. O S S W A L D , Falsche Prophetie im Alten Testament, Tübingen 1 9 6 2 ; TWNT xi, p. 8 0 5 ff.; RGG3 v, 6 2 1 - 6 2 2 . 3 ) Of the same opinion are J. L. M I H E L I C , 'The Concept of God in the Book of Nahum', Interpretation II (1948), p. 199 ff. and E. O S S W A L D , o.e., p. 18, n. 40. I agree with S . J. DE V R I E S , 'The Acrostic of Nahum in the Jerusalem Liturgy', Vetus Testamentum XVI (1966), p. 481, n. 2, that the Nineveh poems belong to the genre of the prophetic oracles against the foreign nations. From this point of view it does not necessarily follow that the book of Nahum contains a prophecy 'im Sinne der von einem Jeremia bekämpften Heilspropheten' (O. E I S S F E L D T , Einleitung in das Alte Testament3, Tübingen 1964, p. 561).

of their aims and views could have crept into the prophetic books, 1 ) especially as regards the description of pseudo-prophetism. Meanwhile, that it proved to be difficult to distinguish between true and false prophets, is shown clearly by Jeremiah's encounter with Hananiah 2) and even more clearly by the statement in Deut. xviii 21-22: And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?'— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him. This statement does not of course offer a ready-made criterion by which one could judge. Matters become even more difficult if we seek to probe the theological or ideological conceptions of these prophets. Is it at all possible to give a somewhat exact description of the theologoumena through which pseudo-prophetism exercised its influence on religious life in Jerusalem and Judah at the close of the eighth century B.C.? Needless to say, if we could trace these theologoumena, we would be in a position to fathom the spiritual climate against which the pre-Exilic canonical prophets made their stand. In general it can be said that the pseudo-prophets subscribed and conformed to the established order not only politically but also in matters of religion. On the question, however, as to the exact components of that order, there is no general agreement among scholars. In this connection opinions differ widely as regards the question whether covenant theology and election theology played a significant and decisive rôle at a relatively early stage, and whether the writings of the earlier canonical prophets should and could be understood against the background of these conceptions. W H I T L E Y , e.g. thinks that the great creative prophets were but little indebted to traditional Israelite belief for the content of their message; in his opinion the prophets conceive of Yahweh's connection with Israel in terms of human relationships rather than that of a covenant. 3 ) F O H R E R has expressed the view that a true covenant theology in the sense of a "rechtlich gültiger und wirksamer Vertrag" commenced only at the time of Deuteronomy and that Yahweh's 1

)

2

) Jer. xxviii.

S

) C. F. WHITLEY,

Ε.

O S S W A L D , O.E., P .

8.

The prophetic achievement, Leiden 1963, pp. 24-44.

connection with his people in pre-Deuteronomic times was nothing but a "Lebensgemeinschaft". 1 ) Some scholars think that electiontheology, in the sense of the election of Israel, only evolved in deuteronomic times. 2 ) With regard to Zion-theology, V R I E Z E N states that the events of the year 701 roused the belief among the people of Judah and Jerusalem that the city of Jerusalem was inviolable because it was the place where Yahweh dwelled in his temple on Zion. 3 ) VON RAD, however, regards Zion-theology as belonging to the most important earlier traditions, without which Isaiah's message cannot be understood. 4 ) Should we succeed in tracing the whole range of ideas held by the pseudo-prophets in the period before the Exile, many of these problems can be viewed in a new light. But in what manner can these theologoumena be traced directly and with some measure of certainty? In this regard I am convinced that we should pay special attention to the disputations between canonical prophets and pseudo-prophets in the prophetic literature of the pre-Exilic period. Of special interest are those disputations containing in all probability quotations of the very words of the pseudo-prophets. Unfortunately theological disputations of this type occur only sporadically in the Old Testament, but nevertheless they are there, and, still more important, there are more of them than has been recognised up to now. Because of their importance as regards the study of the background of the canonical prophets' activity, it seems to me worth while to examine some of these passages more closely. The reason for confining myself to the book of Micah, is that Micah belongs to the earlier canonical prophets and was a contemporary of Isaiah, one of the greatest among them. Should we be able to find definite clues in the book of Micah as to the range of theological ideas held by the pseudo-prophets of his time, then we are also in a position to comprehend the setting of Isaiah's prophetic activity. By 700 B.C. pseudo-prophetism was hardly influenced by canonical prophetism. At that stage, therefore, it must reflect a theology that was shaped during early monarchic times. There is, however, another, more important reason for our special interest in the book of Micah in this connection: I hope to prove that the ) G . F O H R E R , 'Altes Testament — 'Amphiktyonie' oder 'Bund'?', Theologische Literaturieitung 91 (1966), Sp. 900 and ibid., 89 (1964), Sp. 481-500. 2 ) Cp. G. F O H R E R , 'Prophetie und Geschichte', Theologische Literatur^eitung 89 (1964), Sp. 489. 3 ) Th. C . V R I E Z E N , De godsdienst van Israël, Zeist 1963, p. 181. 4 ) G. VON RAD, Theologie des Alten Testaments II, München 1960, pp. 166 ff. 1

" G a t t u n g " of the "Disputationswort" is relatively well attested in this book. At the same time this investigation enables us to study problems such as the intricate structure of the passages in question and the authenticity of a number of seriously disputed passages, particularly in the fourth chapter of Micah. One of the most evident instances of a disputation between prophet and pseudo-prophets occurs in Micah ii 6-11. This passage is expressif verbis characterised as such by the opening words: "Do not preach"—thus Uhey preach, "one should not preach of such things". The authors of these words quoted by the prophet, are the men who tried to prevent Micah and his supporters from prophesying, as they did, prophecy of doom. The persons in question seem to be men who represent the established religious-political order of the day; more specifically, however, the words "thus they preach" (‫ )יטיפון‬seem to indicate the pseudo-prophets as the most influential group among them. Micah's adversaries cannot subscribe to his conception of prophecy; in stubborn opposition they confidently maintain that "disgrace will not overtake us" (vs. 6b). 1 ) In the next verse they state their reasons for having such confidence. In this verse the words ‫ האמור בית יעקב‬in their present form are untranslatable. The rendering "Should this be said, ο house of Jacob?" is nothing but a makeshift, quite out of place in the context which is a quotation from what the pseudo-prophets said. Elsewhere 2 ) I tried to show that the obscure ‫ האמור‬must be read ‫האמיר‬, the hi. of ‫אמר‬. From Deut. xxvi 17, 18—the only other known instances of the Hiph. of ‫—אמר‬we know that it is a terminus technicus referring to the making of a covenant. Taking ‫ בית יעקב‬to be the subject of ‫האמיר‬, we get the following translation: "The house of Jacob affirmed (what has been undertaken by Yahweh)"; however, taking ‫ בית!עקב‬to be the object of ‫האמיר‬, Yahweh being the supposed subject, we have to translate: "He {seil. Yahweh) affirmed (what has been undertaken by) the house of Jacob". 1

) The correct interpretation of these words is known to be difficult. I take ‫ יסג‬from ‫' נשג‬overtake'. The plural ‫ כ ל מ ו ת‬might be explained according to Gesenius-Kautzsch § 145 ο or by changing it to (the sing.) ‫( כ ל מ ו ת‬vide BHK 3 ). 2 ) Vetus Testamentum XVIII (1968), p. 388-391.

The contract referred to here, seems to include the traditional covenant clauses explicitly mentioned in Deut. xxvi 17-18: The Lord shall be your God, and You will be his people. It is most important to note that this reference to the covenant between Yahweh and Israel (understood as a treaty) comes from the pseudo-prophets themselves. This means that in Micah's time this conception of a covenant played an important part and that it stems from pre-prophetic tradition. It is on this covenant, which obviously in view of ‫ יעקב‬.‫ בית‬relates to the Sinai covenant and not to that of David, that they base their bold claim that Yahweh will not forsake them but will remain their loyal partner. In their opinion giving credence to Micah's prophecy of doom amounts to having no confidence in Yahweh and in what He does! For "Is the Spirit of the Lord impatient? Are these his doings?" (vs. 7 b, c).1) The prophet doesn't permit their discussion to peter out, on the contrary, he demonstrates that the pseudo-prophets and their supporters prove to be unworthy of the covenant because of their attitude with regard to the covenant (vs. 8-10). Pseudo-prophetism holds the covenant to be an objective guarantee for national existence: even as all the other canonical prophets Micah discloses the falseness of their confidence. Casting ridicule upon his adversaries, he rapped out: If a man should go about and utter wind and lies, saying: "I will preach to you of wine and strong drink"— he would be the preacher for this people! (vs. II)·2) Before returning to chapter ii, we turn to chapter iv. In doing so we venture upon very slippery ground. There is no consensus of opinion at all on either of the following questions: the structure, the date, the authenticity and the interpretation of this chapter and its component parts. Some scholars ascribe the chapter as a whole to Micah, while others hold it to be post-Exilic; still others consider some verses to be stemming from Micah. 1

) Whether the following sentence (vs. 7c) belongs to the words of Micah's adversaries, is not quite clear, due to the obscurity of the text. 2 ) For another possible translation of the latter words, see below, p. 257, n. 2.

It is of course impossible to go into all the details here as regards the problems of the date and the structure of chapter iv, but we can't avoid raising these questions, be it at least in part. At the moment we are mainly concerned with the verses 9-14. As a rule these verses are held to be a succession of unconnected oracles dating in part possibly from the time of Micah. They are generally divided into three separate pericopes, namely: 9-10; 11-13 and 14. One of the reasons for such a division is the fact that prophecy of weal clearly alternates with prophecy of doom, so much so that because of the marked correspondence between these oracles and the light- and shadow effects in Rembrandt's paintings, a Dutch author called Micah the Rembrandt among the prophets! S E L L I N considered this passage to be the most difficult in the whole book as far as its context and its date are concerned, because—as he put it—"die Situation kaleidoskopartig zwischen Verzweiflung und Triumphgefühl, Unheil und Heil, klar umrissener historischer Lage und unbegrenzter Zukunftserwartung wechselt". 1 ) The question arises whether any prophet or pupil of a prophet, or redactor could have got it into his head to juxtapose words of doom and words of weal in such a clumsy and confusing way. Verse 9 speaks of weal (by implication), vs. 10 of doom, vs. 11-13 of weal, while vs. 14 proclaims doom. That being the state of affairs, I take the liberty to suggest another solution to the problem as to the structure of this passage, that differs from traditional solutions based on the method of an atomising literary analysis. In my opinion the passage in question contains neither more nor less than a disputation between the pseudo-prophets and Micah, in which the words of the arguing parties are juxtaposed. The disputation opens with a statement by the pseudo-prophets (vs. 9), followed by Micah's retort (vs. 10), continued by another statement by the pseudo-prophets (vs. 11-13), again followed by a word from Micah (vs. 14). A characteristic of this "Disputationsw o r t " is that we miss both the ‫ כה אמר יהוה‬and the ‫ יהוה‬CW3-f0rmu1a in the passage. In order to illustrate what I mean, we must have a closer look at the text. In verse 9 we read:

1 ) Ε. S E L L I N , Das Zwölfprophetenbuch*·* (ΚΑΤ XII), Leipzig 1929, p. 332, who considers iv 8-v 5 to be a unit stemming from Micah (except for a later insertion iv 10 b β).

Now why do you cry aloud? Is there no king in you? Has your counsellor perished, that pangs have seized you like a woman in travail? It is quite clear that these words are spoken by one or more persons reproaching the people of Jerusalem (addressed here in the second person feminine) for having anxiety. They obviously lived in fear of an enemy that laid siege to the city (though as to the exact identity of this enemy we are still in the dark). 1 ) According to the speakers the inhabitants have no reason at all to be afraid : they ought to know that there is a ‫מלך‬, a ‫ יועץ‬in Jerusalem! Commentators perhaps rightly consider "your counsellor" to be synonymous with " k i n g " because of the parallelism. On the question as to the identity of the ‫מלך‬, there are different opinions—does it signify the reigning monarch or Yahweh himself? The term ‫יועץ‬ does not necessitate a refuting of the view that " k i n g " relates to God. 2 ) Vs. 12 distinctly refers to the ‫עצה‬, the "plan" of Yahweh (cf. Is. xix 17). Moreover, in Jeremiah viii 19, a text running parallel to our text in more than one respect, the " k i n g " is unmistakably Yahweh : Hark, the cry of the daughter of my people from the length and breadth of the land: "Is Yahweh not in Zion? Is her king not in her?". The conclusive argument, however, for interpreting ‫ מלך‬as referring to Yahweh, to my mind seems to be Micah iii l i b where the prophet says of the pseudo-prophets in Jerusalem: 1 ) Many authors think in terms of the siege of Jerusalem in 701, which is probably right. For Isaiah's comment on the attitude of the city's people after this siege, cp. Is. xxii. 2 ) ‫ ( י ו ע ץ‬a s substantive) denoting Yahweh does not seem to occur elsewhere in the O.T. (cp. P . A . H . DE B O E R , 'The counsellor', Suppl. Vetus Testamentum I I I [Festschrift H. H. Rowley], Leiden 1955, p. 42-71). Therefore, the possibility should always be born in mind that 'counsellor' is not synonymous with 'king'. If it is synonymous, ‫)לך‬£ could be interpreted as referring to the reigning davidic monarch. Then the pseudo-prophets appeal to the divine promises given to the house of David, as their argument does not seem to be without a religious basis. On the strength of the texts cited below, it seems to me, however, that 'king' and 'counsellor' in this connection most probably refer to Yahweh. Cp. also Num. xxiii 21.

its prophets divine for money yet they lean upon the Lord and say: "Is not the Lord in the midst of us ? No evil shall come upon us". Whereas the latter text is a direct quotation from the words of the pseudo-prophets, it is only natural to assume that they are also the speakers in the text under consideration. Should our interpretation of " k i n g " as referring to Yahweh be correct, then the words in vs. 9 can only be interpreted as reassuring words coming from the pseudo-prophets, who point out that Yahweh dwells on Zion, which means that God's mountain will never be shaken nor be overpowered by the enemies. In verses 11-13 they will return to this point soon in order to elaborate on the reasons for their confidence. The object of the pseudo-prophets' statement in vs. 9 is therefore to do pastoral work, to restore the people's confidence, which clearly shows that the verse was not intended to be understood ironically at all.1) It was this kind of pastoral work which Micah challenges in vs. 10: Writhe and groan 2), ο daughter of Zion, like a woman in travail, for truly you shall go forth from the city and dwell in the open country; and you shall go to Babylon! There you shall be rescued, there the Lord will redeem you from the hand of your enemies. That we meet with two different speakers in vs. 9 and in vs. 10, was recognised already e.g. by D U H M , who writes: H o w could the poet possibly write in such a reproachful manner in vs. 9: why are you so frightened when Yahweh himself guards you?, only to do quite the opposite in vs. 10 by calling upon them to be frightened? 3) In quite another way, however, there are very distinct connecting links between vs. 9 and 10: both refer to Jerusalem, c.q. to the daughter of Zion; in both she is addressed in the second person feminine; 1 ) Cp. D . D E D E N , De kleine projeten [De boeken van het Oude Testament], Roermond 1953, p. 217: 'ironisch vraagt de profeet, of zij soms geen koning meer hebben'. 2 ) The exact meaning og ‫ גחי‬is disputed, cp. the commentaries. 3 ) B. D U H M , Anmerkungen χμ den zwölf Propheten [Sonderdruck aus der ZAW], Glessen 1911, p. 50.

in both some form of the verb ‫" חיל‬be in travail" is used with reference to the anxiety of "one in travail" (‫)כיולז־ה‬. There is a connection, but then one by way of contraposition: statement and counter-statement. Over against the prophecy of weal uttered implicitly by the pseudo-prophets, Micah poses his prophecy of doom, although even here judgment implies prospective salvation. This salvation, however, will only be realised there, after the people shall have gone into exile; God will only accomplish it there (note the twice-repeated ‫)!שם‬. Should vs. 10 not be considered to be a post-Exilic addition, but stemming from Micah, on the strength of the fact that the fall of Jerusalem is announced, objections are often raised against the words "you shall go to Babylon". 1 ) None the less I am convinced that they could have been spoken by Micah. An Exile to Babel was predicted by another contemporary prophet too, by Isaiah. 2 ) Even the metre tells against any attempted deletion. Moreover, the clause "there the Lord will redeem you from the hand of your enemies" obviously induced Micah's debating partners to pursue the theme of 'being redeemed from the hand of the enemies' (vs. 11-13).3) Even as in verse 9, where the statement of the pseudo-prophets is introduced by ‫עתה‬, and in verse 10, where Micah uses ‫ כ י ־ ע ת ה‬to introduce his answer after summoning the daughter of Zion to "writhe and groan", the counter-statement of the pseudo-prophets here in verse 11 again opens with 4.‫ )ועתה‬The pseudo-prophets were not in a position to share Micah's views on redemption from the hand of the enemies that dare to lay siege to God's city: 1

) So for instance E. S E L L I N , o.e., p. 332. ) Is. xxxix 6. Many commentators, however, consider the appearance of the name 'Babel' in this verse to be one of the unhistorical traits of chapters Is. xxxvi-xxxix. D E D E N , o.e., p. 2 1 7 , points (apart from Is. xxxix 6 ) to the deportation of the northern population to Babel and the removal of people from Babel to the towns of Samaria (2 Kings xxvii 24). The authenticity of the text can only be settled satisfactorily after a thorough analysis of the Redaktionsgescbichte of the book of Micah. 3 ) One could also argue that it was a redactor who combined the original sayings of Micah in iv, 10a-b by means of 10c-d with the following verses. To my mind, however, this seems less probable. 4 ) ‫ ע ת ה‬is used to introduce an argument or counter-argument. On the use of ‫ ע ת ה‬cp. H . A. B R O N G E R S , 'Bemerkungen zum Gebrauch des adverbialen rv^attāh im Alten Testament', Vetus Testamentum XV ( 1 9 6 5 ) , p. 2 8 9 - 2 9 9 and A. L A U R E N T I N , 'We׳‬P. 26. " ) Cp. CAD Z, p. 7. 28 ) Cp. CAD E, p. 371. 29 ) Afyūa kima mahhê dāmišunu rāmku (Ugaritica V, p. 267:11).

Salvation oracle A full account of an oracle given in the precincts of the temple by a person who was seized by the spirit of God is found in 2 Chr. xx 14 ff. At the time of war with the Ammonites and Moabites, Jehoshaphat and the people gathered in the temple for prayer, and all of a sudden a Levite by the name of Yahziel was seized by the spirit of God in the midst of the assembly hyth llyw rwh yhwh btwk hqhl 30) ; he s a i d . . . " T h u s said the Lord : Have no fear, do not be dismayed by the great horde, for the battle is in God's hands . . . G o down to them tomorrow . . . you will find them at the end of the valley . . . stand firm and wait and you will see the deliverance". Next morning we hear Jehoshaphat saying to the people : "have faith in your God . . . , in his prophets and you will prosper". This type of prophetic encouragement in war is found in the mouth of the prophet in the Mari letter ARM X, 4: "his (Isme-Dagan's) auxiliary troops will be scattered, furthermore, they will cut off the head of Išme-Dagan and put (it) under the foot of my lord. Thus (my lord may say) : 'the army of Išme-Dagan is large and if I (arrive), will his auxiliary troops be scattered from him?' 31) It is Dagan, Adad . . . who march at my lord's side . . ." (11. 23-24). The idea of God going out to war with the Israelites and marching at their side and saving them from the enemy's multitudes is very common in the Bible, and ecpecially instructive in this context are the military exhortations in Exod. xiv 13, Deut. vii 17 ff. 32), xx 1-4, xxxi 1-8, etc. 33 ). The promise of scattering (sapāhu) the enemy's troops is also characteristic of the ancient salvation oracles of the holy war as for example in Num. χ 35: "Stand up, Ο Lord, may your enemies be scattered" qwmh yhwh wypsw ‫־‬,ybyk (cp. Ps. lxviii 2), Ps. cxliv 6: "Make lightning flash and scatter them" (cp. 2 Sam. xxii 15, = Ps. xviii 15 and Ps. lxxxix 11). The promise that the head of the enemy will be put under the foot 30

) Compare, in a neo-Assyrian text: the prophetess prophesied (raggimtu tartaggumu) in the assembly of the land (ina U K K I N ία KUR) (ABL 437, Rev. 1-2, cp. Β. Landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila (1965) p. 48); compare also ABL 149:7, 121:9. 31 ) On the interrogative nature of the sentence, see Moran, p. 48, and note 1 there. 32 ) Note the interrogative opening which recalls the Mari passage (see previous note). 33 ) See G. von Rad, Studies in Deuteronomy (London, 1953), pp. 51 ff., and cp. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, pp. 45 ff.

of the King in the letter just quoted 34) is also known to us from the Biblical sources: Deut. xxxiii 29; Ps. xiv 6; xviii 39; Jos. χ 24-25. In Jos. χ 24 this is even executed in a dramatic way: Joshua calls his officers to put their feet on the necks of the defeated Kings and declares that so will God do to all the enemies of Israel (v. 25) 35 ). Another literary convention found in the context of the prophetic salvation oracle in Mari is: "I shall deliver your enemies into your hand" (nakrêka ina qātīka umalla) (ARM X 8:12-14) 36 ), an exact equivalent of the Hebrew hnnj ntn V *wybyk bjdjk which is a stereotyped formula in the war orcales of ancient Israel (cp. 1 Sam. xxiii 4, xxiv 5, xxvi 8, Judg. vii 7, 1 Kgs. xx 13, 28) and once even related to the Philistines (Judg. xvi 24) 37 ). This is accompanied in the Bible by V tyr' "do not fear", a phrase widely attested in the salvation oracles of the ancient Near East 38 ) and according to some is also found in the prophetic texts of Mari (ARM XIII 114:13-16) 39 ). False Prophets An important point in the Mari letter quoted above ( A M R X, 4) is the sentence: "I am not making them speak, on their (own) they agree" (mimma ul ušadbabšunūti šunūma idabbtíb/4, sitnüma imtahharii) (11. 37-39). This reminds us of the prophets who prophesy "with one voice" (ph ,hd) to Ahab that (the enemy) will be given into the hands of the King (1 Kgs. xxii 13). The messenger of the King who comes to Micaiah in order to persuade him to predict favorably employs a device similar to that of Šibtu in her letter to Zimrilim. In order to disperse doubts about authenticity Šibtu adds "that nobody makes them speak". This tendency is also implied in the words of the messenger to Micaiah in 1 Kgs. xxii 13. In this respect one could learn something from neo-Assyrian texts. Esarhaddon tells 34

) Compare also ARM X, 6:4'-8': u eliiu tazxaZ, "you will stand over him". ) This motif is most common in the Egyptian pictures of war and also in the written Sumerian, Akkadian and Phoenician sources; cp. Kramer, Weinfeld, Beth Mikra 57 (1974), pp. 157-158. 36 ) Cp. RA 42 (1948), pp. 128-32, 11. 30-31; ARM X 7:20-22; ARM XIII 23:14-51. For an iconographie illustration of this idea in the ancient Near East cp. most recently O. Keel, Wirkmächtige Siegeszeichen im AT (1974), pp. 47 f. (note), and there also an Egyptian literary parallel. 37 ) See J. G. Heintz, SVT 17 (1969), p. 128. 38 ) Cp. Jonas C. Greenfield, The Zakir Inscription and the Danklied, Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress ofJewish Studies, Jerusalem 3-11 August 1969, pp. 180 ff. 39 ) lā if)âš; cp. also 1ä taltanarrar (ARM X 80:27); see Heintz, pp. 122 f., but see Greenfield, p. 185, n. 28. 35

us 40) that before entering the bit mumme (the temple workshop) he divided the shares (lists?) between the diviners separately (qātāte ahennâ ukînma) 41) and they gave identical answers, literally: "they agreed with one voice" (kî pi išten indaharama ( = Gt j/ mahāru). The verb mahāru is used as in the Mari passage, and the idiom: pi isten which is employed too in 1 Kgs. xxi 13: ph 'hd. This procedure of dividing the diviners into groups in order to get independent results is known to us also from other neo-Assyrian texts. Thus for example Sennacherib says that he divided the diviners into three groups in order to get the right answer 42). It seems, therefore, that Ahab acted in a similar manner with his prophets and only after identical answers were given (ph 'hd) he decided to go to battle. Dream and Vision Another feature common to the prophecy in Mari and the Bible is the dream 43), and here also identical conventions are employed. The opening formula for the dream revelation in Mari is: ina šuttiya "in my dream" 44) which is exactly like the formula in the dreams of Pharaoh and his servants ‫( בחלומי‬Gen. xl 9, 16; xii 17, 22). And as in Pharaoh's dreams so also in Mari we find the repetition of the dream (ARM XII, 112) 45 ) which implies a strong confirmation of the oracle 4 6 ). This is even explicitly expressed in Gen. xii 32: "As for Pharaoh having had the same dream twice it means that the matter has been confirmed by God ‫ נכון הדבר מעם האלהים‬and that God will soon carry it out". The word ‫ נכון‬used in this context is identical with the word kinu used in connection with reliable dreams in BabyIonia : šunāt šarri kSnā = "the dreams of the King are reliable" 47 ). This verse may also teach us that although the dreams of Pharaoh are not dreams of a prophet they nevertheless are of prophetic significance since they convey to Pharaoh the will of God, which is evident 40

) Borger, Asarhaddon, 82:21 f. ) Cp. CAD A, I 4ennā, p. 184; cp. CAD Κ kānu A 3a 4‫׳‬, p. 163. 42 ) H. Tadmor, Eret^-Israel 5, p. 156, rev. 7-8. 43 ) Cp. A. Malamat EI 8 (1967), pp. 237 ff. 44 ) Cp. e.g. Moran, p. 28. After submitting this article, I came across the article of J. F. Craghan, Journal of the ANE Society of Columbia Univ. 6 (1974), op. 39 ff., who brings up this analogy and elaborates the notion, suggested by M. Held, that ina hittiya is a West Semitism, see pp. 43 f., and note 32 there. 45 ) Cp. A. Malamat, pp. 238 ff. 4e ) Cp. the two dreams of Gudca; see Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, p. 248. 47 ) For references, cp. Moran, p. 23, n. 2. 41

from v. 28: " G o d has revealed to Pharaoh what he is about to d o " 48 ). Another convention belonging to dream revelations in Mari is the figure in the vision which "stands u p " or "steps u p " beside the seer o n e case it is a deity ( A R M X 51 :9), in the other it is (,'ΖφΦ 49)· a man ( A R M X 94 rev. 6). This convention is similarly attested in the revelations in the Bible and likewise in reference to the deity, (Gen. xxviii 13 tisb, 1 Sam iii 10 htysb·, cp. Exod. xxxiv 5, Am. vii 7, ix 1) as well as to a man or angel (Ezek. xliii 6; Zech, i 8, 10, 11, iii 5; Dan. χ 16). In the Bible dreams and visions go together (e.g. Num. xii 6). In Mari too we find accounts of prophetic visions ( A R M X 10) 50) and in one case ( A R M X 9) it seems that we encounter a vision of the assembly of gods in heaven 51) which is to be compared with the vision of Micaiah in 1 Kgs. xxii and the vision of Isaiah in chap. vi. An interesting Biblical parallel to the way divination was practised in Mari may be found in the Balaam story in Num. xxiii 52). Balak and his entourage are said to be "standing beside the sacrifice" nsbjhtysb 7 lltw (Num. xxiii 3, 6, 15, 17). This seems to be equivalent, in our opinion, to: ina têrētim ittana^a^ in connection with the prophetic utterances of the āpilū 53). It seems that the persons on 48

) Cp. also v. 25 V ,/r tPlhym '//; hfydlprch which is to be compared with Amos iv 7 and Gen. xviii 17. 49 ) Moran, p. 28. 50 ) ina bit Itur-Mer imur ummami (11.6-7) = he saw "(the vision) in the temple of Itur-mer as follows". 51 ) The gods and the goddesses drink and swear not to harm the brickwork of Mari; see Moran, Biblica 50, pp. 50-52. This is a kind of ordeal; see Weinfeld, "Ordeal", Encycl. Judaica. 52 ) On Mesopotamian parallels to Balaam's practice of divination see D. Daiches, Hilprecht Anniversary Volume (1909), pp. 60-70; J. Liver, EI 3 (1954), pp. 97 ff. (especially p. 99 in connection with the sacrifices); R. de Largement, "Les Oracles de Bileam et la mantique suméro-akkadienne", Mémorial du Cinquantenaire de l'École des langues orientales anciennes de Γ Institut Catholique de Paris (1964), pp. 35-51. (Cf. also Diet, de la Bible, Suppl. 8, 904 f.) Especially instructive are the parallels concerning the building of seven altars and the sacrificing of seven animals (Num. xxiii 1, 4, 14; cp. Anat. St. 5, 104:108). 53 ) Cp. the text published by G. Dossin apud A. Lods in H. H. Rowley (ed.), Studies in Old Testament Prophecy presented to T. H. Robinson (Edinburgh 1950), p. 104, lines 24-5. The phrase occurs after "thus the prophets said" and has to be translated—in my opinion—"while he (the representative of the King?) was standing at the omens". Note that ittanazz^z (Gtn of uzz‫״‬z u ) corresponds grammatically to htysb, cp. E. A. Speiser, " T h e Durative Hithpa c el: a tan form", J AOS 75 (1955), pp. 118-121. For t'ertum as sacrificial entrails, cp. ARM X 87:7: têrētum lupputa "the entrails (liver) was stricken/infected" (compare ngwi in Hebrew); see also Ludlul 1:51, and Lambert's remark in BWL, p. 284.

whose behalf the sacrificial omens were prepared had "to stand", in other words " t o be present" at the sacrifice while the diviner was watching and expecting the oracular response. (Compare the Rabbinic dictum in connection with the mlmdwt i.e. people's representatives "standing at" the daily services in the Temple: " h o w can a man's offering be offered while he does not stand by it?" (Mishnah Ta'anit iv 2)). Indeed the sacrifices of Balaam and Balak involve constant watching and looking out for the oracle (xxiii 3, 14, 28). This seems also to be implied in the Mari passage just referred to. Immediately after the indication of the âpi/û's prophetic utterances we read that the āpilum of Adad is watching (inassar) at the maškānum which according to A. Malamat equals mskn "tabernacle" 54) (for the "tabernacle" in Israel as an oracular pavilion compare Exod. xxxiii 7 f.) The Rib pattern Prophetic admonition dressed in the form of a lawsuit has been recognized since the 1930's 55 ), although the lawsuit convention has been limited to marital formulae. Hosea's proclamation: "Plead (rjbw) the cause with your mother because she is not my wife and I am not her husband . . . or I will strip her naked and expose her as in the day of her birth" (iii 2-3) had been seen as containing two formulaic elements : 1) the term rib which has forensic overtones 56 ) ; 2) stripping of the divorcee of her garments which is attested in the documents of Mari and Nuzi and in an almost identical context. Thus we find in an Old Babylonian document from Hana 57) : "and if P N the woman says to P N her husband 'you are not my husband' she shall go out naked and they shall take her up to the upper storey of the palace (i.e. expose her)", and in a Nuzi document 58) : "(if after my death she intends to contract another marriage) my sons will strip my wife of her garment and send her out of my house". However a third for54 ) J AOS 82(1962), p. 149, n. 30. However it is also possible to understand maikanum in its conventional meaning "threshing floor" ( A H W , p. 626) which also served for the purpose of hearing oracles (1 Kgs. xxii 10). 55 ) Cp. C. Kuhl, Ζ AW 52 (1934), pp. 102-109, and C. Gordon, Ζ AW 54 (1936), pp. 277-280. 56 ) Cp. J. Limburg, JBL 88 (1969), pp. 301 ff. See especially Jer. iii 1-10, where Jeremiah develops more fully the Hoseanic theme and refers to a written legal document spr krytwt. 57 ) u Summa ΡΝλ aššassu ana PN2 mutiša ul mutimi at ta iqabbi erišifa ussi ana bit rugbat ekallim uhllûSi (BRM IV 52:14, cp. CAD E, p. 320); cp. for discussion, S. Greengus, HUCA 40 (1969), p. 41, n. 21. 58 ) TUG -Šu ía aŠŠatiya mārēja iha?nmasu u uštu bitiya t1šessù (JEN 444:21 cp CAD A / / , p. 464).

mulaic element is to be added and that is the verba solemnia : "She is not my wife and I am not her husband" which is now attested as a legal formula of divorce or of marriage—if put in the positive form—from Old Babylonian times 59) on and down to the Persian period ( 60 ). This formula lies behind the phrase " I will be to you a God and you will be a people tome", which appears in a covenantal context in the Law and in the Prophets 61). In the last fifteen years a new dimension has been added to the problem of rib. It has been argued that the rib admonition reflects the lawsuit of the vassal type 62). The prophets consider the violation of the covenant by Israel as the abrogation of the treaty with the sovereign God-King. This contention was based mostly on the witnesses in the rib speech, which are the same as those of the vassal treaties: heaven and earth, mountains, etc. 63 ). But here again the decisive parallel should be the literary convention. In the Hittite treaties we find, in the context of keeping loyalty to the sovereign, the motif of "the cattle choosing (lit. recognizing) their stable" 64), which is reproduced almost literally by Isaiah in the opening of his lawsuit: "the ox recognizes its master and the donkey its master's crib. Israel does not recognize, my people does not know . . . " (i 3). Besides the images of husband-wife, master-vassal, a third image exists and that is the image of father-son, the relationship of which was also based on verba solemnia·. "You are my son" creating adoption, and "You are not my son" when breaking it 65 ). As in the marriage 59 ) Cp. S. Greengus, "The Old Babylonian Marriage Contract," J AOS 89 (1969), pp. 515 ff. e0 ) Cp. A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri, 15:3 ff.; E. G. Kracling, Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri, 2:3 ff. ; 7:4; 14:3 ff. 61 ) Cp. Weinfeld, Deuteronomy, pp. 80-81, and the reference to Y. Muffs there (p. 81, n. 1). 62 ) See J. Harvey, Biblica 43 (1962), pp. 172-196, and, in more detail, in his book, Le plaidoyer prophétique etc. (1967). 3 ‫)״‬ M ) alpê bit alpēšunu uwaddimimmi (Weidner, Polit. Dokumente aus Kleinasien (1923), no. 7, 1:17 f., 30 f.). The correct interpretation of the phrase was seen by A. Goetze (Ki?uwatna (1940), pp. 36, note 38; (1CAD A /, p. 372; II, p. 190; 1, p. 32 misses the point). Compare also in the Hittite prayer to Arinna: "I am thy servant from old, a heifer from thy stable" (KUB XXI, 27 T:8; see translation bv A. Goetze ANET2, p. 393). βδ ) Cp. CH § 170, where the father legitimizing children born by a slave girl says to them "you are my children" (märü'a), and the Sumerian family law (ana ittišu tablet 7 11. 34-39): "if a father says to his son: "You are not my son' " (ul māriatta). For a thorough discussion of verba solemn'a in adoption see Greengus, J AOS 89 (1969), pp. 517 ff.

dissolution so also in the case of the dissolution of parental relationship the son forfeits house and property and leaves the house naked 66 ). This might be compared with Hosea ix 15: "I hated them . . . I will drive them from my house, I will love them no more" 67 ). Marriage, enslavement ( = vassal relationship) and adoption representing not genetic-natural but artificial formalized relationship, suited well the depiction of the relationship between God and Israel which was formalized by Covenant and thus liable to dissolution following the breach of the Covenant. We must admit however that beyond the judicial formulation which the prophets adopted for depicting the relationship between God and Israel, a strong emotional factor prevails. The love of God for Israel be it depicted as the love of a husband for his wife or of a father for his son is full of emotions and personal sentiments. We are dealing then with legal conventions which were turned into metaphors 68 ). Finally, it should be said that the lawsuit form is not limited to the classical prophets. It is found in ancient poetry (Deut. xxxii) and in the Psalmodie literature : Ps. 1, lxxxi, xcv. Furthermore, the lawsuit is also found in the prophetic messages ascribed to the times of the Judges (Judg. ii 1-5; vi 8-10; χ 11-15; 1 Sam. vii 3 ; xii 6 ff.), and it indeed seems that the lawsuit type was carystalized amongst the popular, so called cultic prophets 69 ). The fact that the lawsuit is found in ancient poetry as well as in historiographical accounts would be sufficient to prove that it is not genuine in classical prophecy but was taken over by them from tradidition although embellished with literary motifs of a different kind. Morality versus Cult In the lawsuit speeches we often find arguments against cultic 66 ) Cp. in the a.m. Sumerian family law: ina biti u tgarum iteli "he forfeits house and wall"; and in a contract from Ugarit: nahlaptašu išakkanma ana sikkuri u ipattar ana sūqi "he (the son who shows disrespect) will put his garment on the (door) bolt and go out into the street" (Thureau-Dangin, Syria 18 (1937), p. 249, 1. 22-23. Compare Ugaritica V, no. 83:8-10 (p. 177)). Cp. R. Yaron, Journal of Juristic Papyrology 15 (1965), pp. 179 if. For the document of Alalah (Wiseman, AT 1953, No. 16) where the son leaving is deprived of everything (ša(jit) see A. Draffkorn-Kilmer, J AOS 94 (1974), pp. 177 ff. e7 ) " L o v e " and "hate" are taken here in the sense of loyalty and disloyalty; cp. Moran, CBQ 25 (1963), pp. 77 ff., for "love" and for "hate" (/«'); cp. j«> in the Aramaic papyri in connection with divorce (Cowley, A P 15:22-29, et al.); and zß ru ί η Akkadian in connection with divorce as well as cancellation of adoption; see references in Greengus, JAOS 89 (1969), p. 518, n. 61. 68 ) Cp. M. Weinfeld, Biblica 56 (1975), p. 125. 69 ) Cp. J. Jeremias, Kultpropbetie und Gerichtsverkündigung etc. (1970).

worship: Observing the moral commandment is the wish of God rather than sacrifice (Isa. i 11-17, Jer. vi 20, vii 22; Mic. vi 6-8 [cp. Ps. 1 18 ff.], Amos ν 21-25). The arguments are usually dressed in the form of a rhetorical question: " T o what purpose are all your sacrifices?" (Isa. i l l ) : " T o what purpose is the incense which comes from Seba?" (Jer. vi 20). "Does God want thousands of rams?" (Mic. χ 6-7), " D o I consume the meat of oxen and blood of the goats?" (Ps. 1 13 f.); "Did you bring me sacrifices and gifts in the desert?" (Amos ν 25). Now the idea of the primacy of morality is also known from Wisdom literature—e.g. Prov. xv 8: "The sacrifice of the evildoer is an abomination to God, the prayer of the upright is his wish" 70 ); "The doing of right and justice is more pleasing to the Lord than sacrifice" (xxi 3); " T h e wicked man's sacrifice is an abomination to the Lord, how much more when he offers it with vileness" (xxi 27; cp. xxviii 9). The same idea comes to expression in the Egyptian wisdom literature. Thus we read in the Instruction to King Merikare : Make firm your place (— grave) with uprightness and just dealing for it is on that which their hearts rely; more acceptable is a loaf 71) of the upright than the ox of the wrongdoer 72). The futility of multiplying sacrifices and ritual is clearly expressed in the admonition of the Egyptian sage Ipuwer 73) : All the amulets/carved figures (twtw wd31v) are insufficient and meaningless. Is it by sacrifice and cleaving asunder to the crocodile? 74) Is it by slaying and roasting to the lion? 75) Is it by pouring libations 70

) φ h rs'-ym twcbt yhwh wtplt yirym rswniv. Compare Isa. i 11 ff., where ^bh and tplb are juxtaposed (vv. 11,15), and similarly / ' bpsty and sn'b npšy (vv. 11, 19), coupled with tw'bh (v. 13). 71 ) According to M. Lichtheim in Ancient Egyptian Literature I (19 73), p. 109, n. 28, which translates bit "loaf" rather than "character" (based on a suggestion of R. Williams, Essays, p. 19). 72 ) " T h e Teaching for Merikare", AN ET2, p. 417. 73 ) Translation: G. Fecht, Zeitschrift fur Ägypt. Spr. 100 (1973), p. 12. According to Fecht this passage is a quotation which shows that the theme was a prevalent one in Egyptian literature. 71 ) The Crocodile-god (alluding to Osiris) before whom the dead are offered, see Fecht, pp. 13-14. 75 ) Alluding to the goddess Sachmet, p. 14. As Fecht remarked (p. 15), it seems that the author deliberately uses the pictures of crocodile and lion in order to indicate that the offerings to the gods are like prey for the wild beasts. Compare the Midrashic saying ascribed to Rabbi Pinehas: "Just as the wolf snatches so the altar snatches the offerings" (Bereschit Rabba, ed. Ch. Albeck, p. 1276) and for the altar being called λύκος " w o l f " cp. Tosefta Sukkah iv 28, and see S. Lieberman, Tosefta Ki-fshutah 4 (1962), p. 909.

(and sacrificing) to the god Ptah? Why do you give it to him?, it does not suffice for him 76). It is misery/sadness (indw) that you give to him. The idea is expressed in the most clear manner in the Egyptian story of the shipwrecked sailor 77) which in the light of the comparison with the psalms quoted below should be seen as a thanksgiving 78). The sailor saved from disaster says there: I shall have brought to you . . . incense for the temples to satisfy every god .. . You will be thanked in my town in the presence of the magistrates (knbt) 79) I shall sacrifice to you oxen as burnt offerings . . . and I shall wring the necks of birds for you . . . Then he (the serpent-god) laughed at me and said : I am the Prince of Punt, myrrh belongs to me . . . Place my good reputation in your town, this is all I ask from you . .. This passage is very close in its concepts and expressions to several passages in the thanksgiving Psalms in the Psalter. Thus we read in Ps. 1 8 ff. : I do not reproach you for your sacrifices . . . I claim no bull from your estate, no he goats from your pens, for mine is every animal of the forest, I know every bird of the mountains . . . Were I hungry I would not tell you for mine is the world and all it holds, do I eat the meat of bulls or drink the blood of he-goats? (Cp. Mic. vi 6 ff.). 76 ) Compare Isa. xl 16: "And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor are the beast of it enough for burnt offerings". It is of interest to note that after this verse comes a passage about the vanity of carved figures and statues not unlike our Egyptian passage. " ) See Faulkner, Wente, Simpson, The Literature of Ancient Egypt (1972), pp. 50 ff. 78 ) The meaning and tendency of this story has not yet been established; cp. W. K. Simpson, p. 50: "The real import of the tale perhaps escapes us." In my opinion, however, the tendency of the story is expressed by the recurring exhortations to praise and give thanks for salvation: " H o w happy is he who tells what he has experienced (lit. tasted)" (1. 124): " I shall tell what happened to me, what I saw of your power, you will be praised in the city before the magistrates {knbt) of the whole land" (140 f.); "Place my good repute in your town, this is all I ask from you" (1. 160), "I placed myself upon my belly to thank him" (1. 168), "I gave praise upon the shore to the lord of this island" (171 f.). Thanksgiving psalms on the occasion of coming back alive from a dangerous journey by sea were common in ancient world; cp. the Psalm of Jonah (ii 3-10), and Ps. cvii 23-32 where the rescued person praises God in the presence of the congregation and the elders (v. 32) as in the Egyptian text quoted above (11. 170 f.). Ps. cvii, which enumerates four cases for thanksgiving, is paralleled by a passage in the Šamaš Hymn where Šamaš is extolled for saving the traveller on a difficult road, the seafarer in the dreadful waves, the prisoner in jail and the sick (Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Lit., p. 131, 11. 65-78), the same cases found in Ps. cvii. For miracles of the same type recorded in Roman Egypt (for the glory of the deities), cp. A. D. Nock, Couversion (1933), pp. 83 ff. 79 ) Knbt are the councillors and the judges, who parallel the z1 n y m Ps. cvii 32; see previous note.

Like the Egyptian text the Psalms which indulge in polemics against sacrifice also stress the idea that God wants to be praised and thanked rather than offered sacrifices. Thus we read in Ps. li 17-18: Ο Lord, open my lips and let my mouth declare your praise. You do not want me to bring sacrifices. You do not desire burnt offerings 8Ω). and in Ps. lxix 31 : I will praise the name of God with a song and will extol him with thanksgiving (hymn) and this will be more favorable to him than an ox with horns and hooves. It is not without significance that both in Israel and in Egypt the problem of the religious value of sacrifices is dealt with in Wisdom literature, in texts of prophetic nature 81) and in hymnodic-thanksgiving literature. What is common to all these sources is the juxtaposition of spiritual worship with cultic worship and this is expressed by rhetorical questions like "do I eat them?", "why all the sacrifices and incense?" Is it by sacrifice (that one can satisfy God)? It is worthwhile to note that in this respect we encounter in the Psalmodie literature the same difficulties which occur in the Egyptian texts. Thus we find immediately after the passage quoted from the Instruction for Merikare about the loaf of the just man which is more acceptable than the ox of the wrongdoer: "Serve God . . . with offerings and with carving. . . God is aware of whoever serves him" (129-130). We face a similar problem in Ps. 1 82). After speaking about the vanity of multiplying sacrifices (vv. 8-13) the psalmist states surprisingly: "Sacrifice a thank offering to God etc." (v. 14); and also at the end of this Psalm: " H e who sacrifices a thank offering honors me" (v. 23). It seems as if by these additions both authors wanted to make themselves clear that they do not reject sacrifices totally. Their aim was only to stress that sacrifice has no value when accompanied by evil 83). 80 ) Following the translation in The Book of Psalms by Greenberg-GreenfieldSarna JPS (1972). 81 ) For the messianic nature of the Admonitions of Ipuver, cp. M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. I (1973), pp. 149-150. 82 ) Ps. li 20-21, which also seems to contradict the previous section, has long been recognized as an addition; see Ibn Ezra ad loc. See, however, the next note. 83 ) S. Mowinckel, The Psalms in Israel's Worship 2 (Oxford, 1962), pp. 21-22, explains li 20-21 in like manner, and does not see any contradiction with what is said before: "When God has looked in mercy upon the sinner and upon his people, and restored normal relations, then offerings, too, are a normal expression of the grateful homage and honour which the congregation owes to him" (p. 22).

One has to admit that there is a difference here between the prophetic attitude and that of the Psalms. The prophets are concerned with morality versus cult while the Psalmist is mostly concerned with praise versus cult. But this difference can be explained by the very nature of the Psalms. Songs and Thanksgiving are the most characteristic part of the Psalms (cp. the name thlym), and it is only natural that the problem of praise versus sacrifice should be given expression here. In fact the moral issue comes to expression also in the Psalms (1 16 ff, li 19) though in a less explicit way than in Prophecy. In contradistinction to the Psalms the book of Proverbs like the Prophets juxtaposes morality versus cult. A similar difference actually exists in Egyptian literature. In the "Instruction for Merikare" the issue is righteousness versus sacrifices whereas in the "Shipwrecked Sailor" which bears the character of a thanksgivings, the issue is praise versus sacrifice. It is clear then that the prophets were not the first to undermine the value of sacrifice in worshipping G o d : this was already stressed hundred of years before the prophets by the Egyptians and also by the Psalmists and wise men in Israel. Furthermore, in the light of the aforementioned parallels there is no basis for Gunkel's contention that the Psalms which take issue with sacrifices are prophetic. On the contrary it turns out that the prophets developed a motif which was current in popular admonition in Israel as well as in ancient Egypt. Violation of Morality as cause for destruction Another feature which has been seen as characteristic of classical prophecy was morality as a national historical factor. Kaufmann 84), for example, argues that classical prophets were the first to consider sins of individual nature like deceit, bribery, exploiting the poor etc. as determining the fate of the nation. According to Kaufmann, the Pentateuch and the Former Prophets see in idolatry and cultic deviation the cause for destruction while the prophets saw in the social crimes the main cause for destruction and exile. One must say that although this distinction is generally correct it cannot be seen as valid all along the line. For example, in the most ancient code we find that if the people maltreat widows and orphans they will be killed with the sword (Ex. xxii 23-24) that is: they will perish in 84

) The Religion of Israel, pp. 157 ff.

battle, which is not unlike the prophetic warnings (e.g. Isa. ix 15 ff.) 85 ). However, surprisingly enough the idea of moral behaviour as a decisive factor for the survival of the nation is found even in pagan literature. Thus when describing the moral decay of Babylon before its destruction the Esarhaddon inscriptions 86 ) tell us: the people living in it (Babylon) answered each other Yes, (in their heart): No 8 7 ); they plotted evil . . . they (the Babylonians) were oppressing the weak/poor and putting them into the power of the mighty, there was oppression and acceptance of bribe within the city daily without ceasing; they were robbing each other's property; the son was cursing his father in the street . . . then the god (Enlil/ Marduk) became angry, he planned to overhelm the land and to destroy its people. This passage reminds us especially the prophecy of Micah vii 1 ff. : there is no upright man, people hunt each other, the officer and the judge ask for bribe, the son despises the father, the daughter rises against her mother . . . The Isaianic concept of Jerusalem as the city of faithfulness and justice ((yr hsdq qryh η Ìtnntí) is also not unique to classical prophecy. Similar attributes were ascribed to Nippur the city of Enlil in the Sumerian Hymns. Thus we read in the Hymn to Enlil 88 ): Hypocrisy, distortion, abuse, malice . . . enmity, oppression, envy, (brute) force, libelous speech, arrogance, violation or agreement, breach of contract, abuse of (a court) verdict, (all these) evils the city does not tolerate . . . the city endowed with truth where righteousness (and) justice are perpetuated. The last sentence reminds us of sdqylyn bh in Isa. i 23. The phrase 85 ) Cp. also Gen. xviii 19, which clearly indicates that the realization of the promise to Abraham is conditioned by the establishment of righteousness and justice. 86 ) nišē āÍib libbišu anna 1dla ahameš etappulu, idabuba sūrrati . . . enšu i^abbilu, šarraku ana danni, ina qereb āli dullulu, mahar katrê ibbasima, ūmišam la naparkā imíu^u būiê ša aframeš, māru ina sūqì itarrar abašu, igugma dEnlil . . . ana sapān māti bulluqu nišēša iktapud lemuttim (R. Borger, Die Inschriften Asarhaddons (Graz, 1956), p. 12, Ep. 3, Fassung a, b, c, 11. 7-14; p. 13). 87 ) For this interpretation cp. Borger, p. 12, note 00. 88 ) Cp. S. N. Kramer, ANET3, pp. 573-74. For the Sumerian text (with translation and annotations), cp. D. Reisman, Two Neo-Sumerian Royal Hymns, (University Microfilms, Ann-Arbor, Michigan, 1969), pp. 44 f., 11. 20 ff.

"city of justice, the faithful city" ljr bsdq qrjh n^mntì) found in Isa. i 26 (cp. Jer. xxxi 22 mvh hsdq) is also attested in the Assyrian literature in reference to the Babylonian city Borsippa: in Borsippa, the city of truth and justice (àl kitti u mīíati)

89

).

A similar attitude is reflected in the so called "Advice to a Prince" in the Babylonian literature 90). There we read: If a king does not heed justice, his people will fall into anarchy and his land w‫־‬ll be devastated . . . if he does not heed his nobles, his life will be cut short. If he does not heed his adviser, his land will rebel against him . . . If citizens of Nippur are brought before him for judgment and he accepts bribe and treats them with injustice, Enlil, lord of the lands, will bring a foreign army against him . . . If he takes the money of his citizens and puts it into his treasure . . . Marduk . . . will give his wealth and property to his enemy. If he mobilized the whole of Sippar, Nippur and Babylon and imposed forced labour on the people . . . Marduk . . . will turn his land over to his enemy . . . This passage has broad implications for the law of the king in Deut. xvii, for the story of the disruption of the Kingdom in 1 Kgs. xii, and also for the admonition of Jeremiah in Jer. xxii 13 ff., which cannot be discussed in the framework of the present study 91). It is true we lack in the Mesopotamian literature the moral pathos and the vehemence of expression found in classical prophecy and there is no indication that these ideas were disseminated there not to speak of an ideology which shaped the life of the nation as it was the case in Israel. One must admit, however, that the very notion of social justice as determining the fate of a nation is found in Mesopotamian literature. We have seen that basic procedures of prophetic activity as well as basic patterns of the prophetic message are found in the ancient Near East, especially in Mesopotamia. We intend in the future to show that basic ideological concepts—such as the metropolis as world centre, messianic hopes, the appearance of the deity for world judgement—also have their roots in the ancient Near East, though their development and realization in Israel remain unique. 89

) See W. G. Lambert, J AOS 88 (1968), p. 126, 11. 16 f. ) W. G. Lambert, Babylonian Wisdom Lit., pp. 112 f. al ) Cp. provisionally my article in Leshonenu 36 (Oct. 1971), pp. 5-6. 90

F R O M

E A R L Y

T O

C L A S S I C A L

C O N T I N U I T Y

A N D

P R O P H E C Y :

C H A N G E

by MENAHEM HARAN Jerusalem

It is an indisputable truth that classical prophecy, which made its appearance in Israel in the second half of the 8th century B.C., was preceded by long preparatory stages of spiritual growth, formation of patterns of activity and refinement of means of expression. Classical prophecy is only the direct continuation of early prophecy, whose beginnings were rooted in much earlier times than the 8th century B.C., and which, for its part, was certainly related to some forms of mantic and ecstatic activity which were found in the ancient Near East and preceded the emergence of prophecy itself. A number of specific features serve to distinguish early from classical prophecy, and several of these will be discussed below. I One such particular feature of early prophecy is its mode of activity in bands with collective ecstasy accompanied by rhythmic movements and disorientation of the senses—an ecstasy which is apt to infect even the uninvolved onlooker and to drag him into the group (1 Sam. χ 5-6, 10-13, xix 20-24). The case of Eldad and Medad is said to have been somewhat unusual in that these two were far away from the company, but as "they were among those registered", that is, were intended to be included among the elders who prophesied, the ecstatic frenzy infected them as well (Num. xi 24-30). Another feature of early prophecy is the use of musical instruments and the notion that music is a means of awakening ecstasy and attracting divine inspiration (2 Kgs. iii 15; cf. 1 Sam. χ 5). Most probably, this use of musical instruments was also accompanied by rhythmic movements and tended to develop into dance (cf. Exod. xv 20)1). 1

) A method of producing ecstasy mentioned as Baal was that of cutting themselves "with swords gushed out upon them". The text points out that custom", implying that the prophets of Yahweh did xviii 28).

typical of the prophets of and lances until the blood this was done "after their not act in this way (1 Kgs.

Such features would certainly have been inconceivable within the domain of classical prophecy. A further feature of early prophecy is its propensity to special places of oracular activity. Particularly conspicuous in this respect is its affinity to Mount Horeb (Sinai), which in the circles of early prophets was certainly conceived of as the place par excellence at which to attain divine revelation. Accordingly, Elijah goes all the way to that mountain, a distance of forty days and forty nights, and there he receives by divine command the main mission of his life: to lay upon Israel terrible sufferings until the people dwindle in number as a punishment for worshipping Baal in the days of Ahab's dynasty (1 Kgs. xix 8-18). It seems likely that the image of this mountain in the Exodus narratives, with the descriptions of theophanies taking place on it, is drawn mainly from the concepts of early prophecy, or at least is recast in its spirit, while the mountain itself, as a site of prophetic sacredness, was one of the central symbols of that early prophecy. Indeed, in this manner this mountain is depicted particularly by E, which in character is an evidently prophetic (that is, early prophetic) source. An additional feature of early prophecy—which, in a way, is related to its proclivity to prophetic holy-places or is just another manifestation of that proclivity—is its peculiar attraction to permanent institutions of oracular activity. One such institution is, for example, the 'ôhel mô^êd, "tent of meeting", particularly as described in Exod. xxxiii 5-11; Num. xi 16-17, 24-30, xii 4-10; Deut. xxxi 14-15 (all of which are E, either directly or indirectly). The tent of môiêd is conceived of as an institution placed at a distance outside the settlement. It is a site of group ecstasy as well as of individual inspiration; Moses, together with his attendant, and also "everyone who seeks the L o r d " go there to acquire a link with the divine. This tent, with the portrayals of theophanies occurring beside it, is only an "institutionalized" reflection of the revelation on Mount Horeb (or rather, to the contrary: the theophany on the mountain is patterned upon the particular features that were ascribed to this institution of oracular activity) 2 ). Such a connexion with special institutions, whose sole purpose was, as it were, to stir up the prophetical capacity itself, is totally unknown to classical prophecy (just 2 ) The character of this institution was the subject of my discussion in JSS 5 (1960), pp. 50-65; in a rewritten form it will constitute a chapter in my forthcoming book Temples and Temple-Service in Ancient Israel.

as the latter became entirely foreign to group ecstasy), for, as we know, the classical prophets were capable of receiving divine revelations in almost every place, even by the river Chebar in Babylonia. Another expression of early prophecy's proclivity for special institutions is its connexion with houses of God and the notion that the temple's holy-of-holies can serve as a place of divine revelation to prophets. Samuel hears the voice of God calling to him when he is "lying down within the temple of the Lord, where the ark of God was" (1 Sam. iii 3-10) 3). As regards Isaiah, who "saw the Lord seated on a throne, high and exalted, and his train filled the temple", it is nowhere stated that this prophet entered the temple; what Isaiah saw was nothing else than the visionary, heavenly throne, for the seraphim standing in attendance upon God and declaring his holiness (Isa. vi 1-3) only confirm that it is just a prophetical vision which has nothing to do with the material cherubim of the holy-of-holies. Yahweh's calling to Samuel from the place of the ark corresponds to the cloud of glory, which, according to P's tradition, constantly rested upon the wings of the cherubim on the kappnret, the ark-cover, and from which Yahweh would speak to Moses (Exod. xxv 22, xl 34; Lev. xvi 2; Num. vii 89). There should be no doubt that this tradition is based on the presumption that the temple was also a suitable place for divine communication, and it was for this reason that the priestly writers saw fit to refer to the tabernacle by the term "tent of meeting", which originally—as the use of this term by Ε shows—denoted not the temple (although the temple, too, could function as a place of divine communication) but the oracular institution the location of which was "outside the camp, far off from the camp" (Exod. xxxiii 7). It is therefore not surprising that in the narrative of Samuel the temple at Shiloh is 3

) The purport of this statement is: within the temple of the Lord, in the inner room of which (in other places this room is designated debtr or qūdeí baqqodāSim, "the holy-of-holies") was the ark of God. There is no basis for inferring from this narrative, as some scholars have done, that the early Israelite sanctuaries consisted of only one room in which the ark was stored. This narrative, which attained its literary formulation not earlier than the beginning of the monarchy (when the internal division of the temple into an inner and an outer sanctum was already well recognized—if it had not been accepted in Israel even before that time) has the simplicity and vagueness of a folk story. As concerns the plan of the Israelite temple it would be better to resort to all the other evidence (not necessarily that of Ρ alone) which, for the most part, is also quite early, and even though it may be somewhat later than the narrative of 1 Sam. i-iii it still contains clear and reliable information on this matter.

also referred to as the "tent of meeting", and that in an abrupt priestly remark tacked on to the narrative (1 Sam. ii 22) 4). The tradition itself, which conceives of the temple as one of the prophetic "institutions" and regards the focal point of cultic sanctity as a place of divine communication, is certainly early, viz. it is rooted in the world of early prophecy. In the spirit of early prophecy was certainly shaped even the figure of Moses himself, in Ρ and a fortiori in the other pentateuchal sources. It is obvious that to the world of classical prophecy the afore-mentioned conception of the temple looks entirely foreign. Such a conception could not possibly have arisen and taken shape in the world of the Latter Prophets. II An outstanding feature which typifies classical prophecy is the use of the written word as a medium of expression and creativity. Classical prophecy is, therefore, mainly literary prophecy—in contrast to early prophecy which was not. N o one would deny that alongside their literary work the classical prophets also engaged in oral and rhetorical activity. Moreover, it was rhetorical characteristics that shaped the form and style of the works of literary prophecy, and some of these works may indeed sound like pieces of real speech. What lends support to such an impression is the conventional introductory formulae employed in the prophetical writings : "Thus spoke Yahweh", "Hear the word of Yahweh", "Give ear (ha,a%inü) . . .", as well as the concluding f o r m u l a e : ne*um

Yahweh,

‫ג‬

āmar

Yahiveh,

" f o r (Yahweh's, my) m o u t h

has spoken", or such expressions as " G o and proclaim in the hearing 4 ) The end of this verse: "and how they lay with the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting" (1 Sam. ii 22) is missing in L X X (and also in 4QSam a ), which has led modern scholars to claim that this is a later addition after Exod. xxxviii 8. However, it is hardly conceivable that a sentence stamped with P's style should be considered a mechanical addition originating from the post-canonical phase of the transmission of the Bible. It is much more reasonable to consider this a sign of priestly "editorial" activity, which means that the sentence is an integral part of the text in the form it has come down to us. In this part of the composition of the Former Prophets, though, the priestly "editing" consists of only very slight pen-strokes (similar to what occurred in the first verses of 1 Kgs. viii, or in the Deuteronomistic editing of the whole of the Book of Samuel). The L X X and Qumran versions, however, omitted this sentence— perhaps in order to turn a blind eye to a very distasteful act of the priests (cf. Α. Geiger, Urschrift und Übersetzungen der Bibel2 [Frankfurt a. Main, 1928], p. 272) or because of the palpable tension between this sentence and the rest of the narrative.

of . . .", " G o and say . . .",yö^mar Yahweh, and indeed the expression iPmör, "saying'' itself which betrays a clear oratorical character. For all this, however, there can be no doubt that the writings of the classical prophets available to us are literary works which, by their very nature, were intended for the reader, not for the listener. It would be inaccurate to consider them orations committed, as it were, to writing. The rhetorical form which is stamped on many of these works is certainly not fortuitous ; it has something to do with the historical fact that literary prophecy was only the continuation of hundreds of years of prophetic activity which had expressed itself in an oral context. However, the form impressed upon these works does not endow them with an authentic rhetorical quality. One could provide quite a few examples from world literature of the use of rhetorical forms merely as a literary device. (This is actually what happened even to Deuteronomy, the rhetorical form of which is only a literary design, while its words are put in the mouth of Moses, which to a certain extent makes it even a pseudepigraph.) In the case of the works of the literary prophets 5 ) there is a concrete historical reason for their rhetorical form. However, the exquisite refinement of these works, the erudition with which they are loaded, the verbal selectivity and balance ingrained in them, the striking artistic intensity which distinguishes them—all these qualities serve to attest, beyond any doubt, that the form of these works is the accomplishment of the pen alone. None of them can possibly be regarded as an oration taken down in a kind of "shorthand". The literary work of a classical prophet, if preserved, is available to us in writing, but the live address, which preceded it, was never recorded by any kind of phonograph and we certainly have never heard it. With regard to its form, scope, and nature one can only grope in the dark. It is a widely accepted opinion that the prophetic speech was mainly short and compact, cast in a poetic mould, but on being written down it became longer and even took on prose elements. As against this, the opposite view has already been expressed, that the prophetic speech might have occasionally reached the proportions of a real composite address, with transitions and changes of style within one rhetorical framework. However, even 5

) Perhaps also in the case of Deuteronomy—at least according to G. von Rad's theory; see the first chapter of his Deuteronomium-Studien2 (Göttingen, 1948), Ε. Tr. Studies in Deuteronomy (London, 1953); Gesammelte Studien zum AT (München, 1958), pp. 33-41.

if we accept this second view (which is also a mere conjecture), it would still not provide an answer to the question before us 6 ). For only if we were to suppose that the prophetic oration was immediately and accurately written down, would we be able to learn from the written prophecy about the form of the oration which preceded it. But this is just the point: such writing down did not take place, and the question is whether or not the written prophetic work reflects the live oration—is there any congruence between the two, if not verbal then at least real and adequate? The answer can only be negative. That is to say, the prophetic activity, in fact, found its expression in two different channels: the prophet spoke and the prophet wrote, and the correlation between these two means of expression was neither complete nor even substantial. Substantial correlation between the prophet's speech and his written work is inconceivable just for the reason that, on account of the simplicity and lack of sophistication of scribal techniques in those times, there was no possible way by which a live oration, if it attained any considerable length, would have been faithfully and precisely recorded. This is the rule in the Old Testament books in general, that when the content of an oral speech is reported in any of them—a speech which is not just a literary moulding (for example, in the Deuteronomic style), but is a part of a narrative framework— it is extremely short, sometimes extending to only a verse or two. This is not because the actual speech tended to be "short and compact", as one might be led to think, but rather because it was recounted in a short and compact form. Thus, for example, in Jer. xxvi it is related that the prophet delivered a fateful address in the temple court in which he compared Jerusalem to Shiloh and declared, 6

) The former view has been propounded mainly by H. Gunkel and his school; see, e.g., his Die Schriften des AT in Auswahl, II, 2 (Göttingen, 1915), pp. XL-XLIV. But it is also found in the writings of scholars who preceded Gunkel. Y. Kaufmann, Tôledôt Hā^Emûnāh HaY!ire V/7 3 (Tel Aviv, 1947), pp. 49-50, was attracted to the second view. Kaufmann also maintained that the prophetic address and the written prophecy were coexistent and complemented each other. The prophet delivered his address before a rather small circle of listeners. When he wrote it down, it reached distant readers, and occasionally it was redelivered by being read aloud from a text. "The prophet had, then, a narrow circle of listeners, a wider circle of readers and still wider circle of those who heard what was written" (pp. 53-4). One may agree or disagree with this description as well (about reading aloud of a prophecy from a written text, we have no evidence but the incident mentioned in Jer. xxxvi 1-18, which was definitely exceptional). However, the question still remains whether at the time the prophet wrote down his words the essential form of the live address was substantially preserved.

for the first time in his mission, that total destruction awaited Jerusalem and its temple, in reaction to which the people sought to have him executed. The extent of this address is here less than three verses (see vv. 4-6) which can be read at a glance, although before that Yahweh warns Jeremiah to speak "all the words that I have commanded you to speak to them, do not keep anything back" (v. 2), as if they attained some length. In another place in the Book of Jeremiah (vii 1-20), we find a rewritten version of the prophecy whose original form relates to the focus of the story in Jer. xxvi 7 ). However, it would be precipitate to claim that the version of Jer. vii 1-20, even in its primary form, is the genuine address which according to Jer. xxvi 4-6 the prophet delivered in the temple court. For the prophecy Jer. vii 1-20 is only a literary work which took its verbal shape at the writer's desk, and is in no way a recorded oration (for an actual piece of rhetoric even the passage Jer. vii 3-15 would be too meagre, and a speaker would certainly have finished these verses before he had attracted the attention of a handful of listeners). From this point of view, complete correlation between the prophet's address and his literary work would be possible only if the writing preceded the speech, that is, if the written work served as a kind of previously "prepared text" of the oration. However, in this matter, those scholars are certainly in the right who have already pointed out that in biblical times this was not the normal order (unless it was a special case which was explicitly regarded as out of the ordinary, such as the one described in Jer. xxxvi 1-18), and the sequence prevailing in the Old Testament is as a rule one of speech preceding writing. Moreover, even if the prophet had it in mind to write down his oral speech, there certainly must have been a span of time, great ') The verses following Jer. vii 15 are a lyric "response" to the announcement of calamity made before—a response examples of which are to be found in the literary formulations of Jeremiah's prophecies (see below); for this particular form of appendage to an announcement of calamity ("As for you, do not pray for this people" etc.), cf. xii 14; also xiv 11. Further on the text merges into a description of the worship of the Queen of Heaven "in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem". Consequently, the whole passage consisting of vv. 16-20 is connected to what precedes it and there is no reason to see here the beginning of a fresh literary unit. Note also the wāw copulative in w^attāh, "as for you" (the following unit consists of vv. 21-28). At the same time, in the unit vii 1-20 as a whole one can discern certain signs of rewriting and expansions which suggest that this is not the primary version of this prophecy. Cf. W. Rudolph, Jeremia3 (Tübingen, 1968), pp. 51-3.

or small, between the delivery of his speech and the writing. This span of time, even if it was short, was a matter of significance. It meant that, in a sense, at the time of writing the prophet was already a "different person"—in a different state of mind and mental constitution, which definitely removed him from the excitement he had experienced while speaking. Inasmuch as it is unthinkable that an ancient writer would have even a small portion of the modern proclivity for precision and the eagerness to preserve, as accurately as possible, each phrase just as he had uttered it—it is clear that the act of writing with the circumstances surrounding it would already be enough to shift him away from the tumult of oration and toward the literary undertaking which involves exertions and limitations of its own. At the time of writing he already directs himself to the reader, not to the listener, and being liberated from the agitation of oral speech he must now seek the artistic and polished idiom by which to give expression to his prophetic experience. This would be the case all the more so the longer became the delay from the oral speech, for then the difference between the speech and the written propecy would only be expanded and the relation between them might only be general. What is, then, the relationship between the prophetic literary unit and the address that preceded it? It may be said that the written prophecy contains, at the most, among other things, a kind of paraphrase of the content of the actual address, but in a summarized form and only in a literary recasting. In addition, it is only natural that such sorts of elements should have cropped up in the written prophecy which were literary in their intrinsic quality and were directed solely to the reader. This was not an "expanding" of the prophetic address with the help of literary components, but rather a direct moulding of the prophetic unit in a literary shape and in such a way that an echo of the speech was still heard in it. Obvious literary components, which would clearly have nothing to do with the living address, are, for example, the well-known "monologues" (or "confessions") of Jeremiah, which sometimes take on the character of prayers and by which the prophet gives us a glimpse of the conflicts within his soul and of the tragic breach between the inevitability of his mission and his personal suffering 8 ). Modern commentators 8

) There are those who maintain that the monologues, scattered between chapters ix-xx of the Book of Jeremiah, were originally assembled in a special collection; cf., e.g., O. Eissfeldt, Einleitungin das AT3 (Tübingen, 1964), pp. 481-2;

regard these monologues as independent literary units—to my mind, however, quite without justification. From a typological point of view, these components are certainly very particular, as they do indeed stand out from the context in their peculiarity. However, it is impossible to excise them from the literary units without, in every case, destroying the continuity of the literary texture. These monologues are direct, instantaneous responses to the terrifying content of the divine message. Consequently, not only should they not be removed from the literary context, but, quite the contrary, in each instance we should search for the oracle of doom to which the prophet could not help responding by giving expression to his personal grief in his lyric complaints to heaven. Again, it is worthy of mention that there are to be found literaryprophetic units, and even whole divisions of prophetic material, which, in the nature of things, could not possibly be preceded by any rhetorical activity whatsoever, but rather represent simple literary works (which, of course, serve as expressions of prophetic also Y. Kaufmann, ΤôIedot Hā^Emúnāh HaYišre>ēlít 3 (Tel Aviv, 1947), pp. 411, 444-5. Passages of analogous character which appear in previous chapters, such as iv 19-21, viii 18-23, are defined as "laments" (Eissfeldt, pp. 483-4). It seems to me, however, that from a typological, or at least from a functional, point of view, there is no real reason to make a distinction between these two types. In their character, the "laments" no less than the monologues come near to prayers, while tones similar to those of the laments are also found in the monologues (for example, xiv 17-18, xv 18; cf. also xii 7-11). Besides, before as well as after chapter xi we find, in similar contexts, passages that in every respect can be regarded as prayers (for example, χ 23-24, xvi 19-20, xvii 12-14), and prayers also appear in this part of the Book of Jeremiah in other places—not necessarily in the special context of the "response" (for example, the prayers in which the prophecies "concerning the drought" in chapters xiv-xv are enclosed; in xvii 5-8 a prayer serves as a form of prophecy). It will be more to the point, therefore, to maintain that the laments as well as the monologues, both of which basically relate to prayers, and occasionally also ordinary psalmodie prayers, appear in the literary formulations of Jeremiah's prophecies in at least identical function—inasmuch as they give expression to his personal lyric response to the announcement of doom embodied in the word of God. After chapter xx, however, there are no more examples of such a phenomenon. (The reason is that chapter xxvii already marks the beginning of a new division in the Book of Jeremiah, the one of consolation prophecies [xxvii-xxxv], followed by the divisions of stories about the prophet [xxxvi-xlv] and prophecies against the nations [xlvi-li], as is explained in my book Teqûpôt Û-Môsâdôt BaMiqrā'' [Tel Aviv, 1973], pp. 269-278; and in the material pervading these divisions there is no place for such a lyric response). Thus, the suggestion that the monologues were originally assembled together in a special collection must be rejected—at least for the reason that in every case the monologue (as also the lament and most of the prayers) actually serve as an inseparable part of the literary unit (see also below).

inspiration). Such are the descriptions of the prophets' calls in general and Ezekiel's "chariot vision" (Ezek. i-iii) in particular, the latter's detailed visionary programme (Ezek. xl-xlviii), Zechariah's series of prophetic dreams (Zech, i 4-vi 8), to all appearances—also the first division of the prophecies of Second Isaiah (Isa. xl-xlviii), the category of "oracles against the nations" in its entirety, and other things of this kind 9 ). Since the category of "oracles against the nations" presents itself already in the works of the earliest classical prophets, it follows that this sort of basically literary opera, which was not preceded by any oral address, was in existence from the very beginning of classical prophecy. This inference could be strengthened by additional considerations, so that it would be preferable not to speak of a process of "literarization" which prophecy, as it were, underwent (as has been suggested by scholars) but rather to say that the phenomenon of writing underlay classical prophecy from its very outset. Since this phenomenon was one of the features which distinguished classical from early prophecy, one may deduce that the adoption of the literary medium was not so much a process (even when viewed within the broader framework of the prophetic movement in general) as it was a turning-point. Ill

Another important question is whether the ecstatic element itself, which was so deeply ingrained in early prophecy, was still preserved in classical prophecy. In this regard, there is a significant difference of opinion between modern scholars. There are those who claim that the ecstatic element left its imprint on the classical prophets as well, and psychologically speaking there was no difference between the activity of these prophets and the activity of those who preceded them (or those popular prophets who remained active down to later times). There are, on the other hand, those who deny, or minimize, the existence of abnormal psychological elements in the activity of the classical prophets, and from this point of view (even from this one) find a great difference between the classical and the early prophets 10 ). 9 ) I find that J. Lindblom, in one of his first works, already took a position close to this. See his Die literarische Gattung der prophetischen Literatur—Eine Iiterargeschichtliche Untersuchung χμηι AT (Uppsala, 1924), pp. 1-7, 57-8. However, our arguments are not similar, and our general conceptions are not similar either. 10 ) Among those who hold the first view, mention may be made of A. Lods, H. Gunkel, G. Hölscher, T. H. Robinson. Among those who entertain the

S. Mowinckel, for his part, devoted a number of studies to this subject, and though his opinion generally fluctuated between the two opposing views, it actually came nearer to the second position. On the one hand, he emphasizes that whenever the classical prophets uttered the word of God they, no less than the prophets who preceded them, were in a mental state which was definitely far from the normal and they surely must have been subject to a certain ecstasy. On the other hand, he emphasizes the difference between the classical and the other prophets, and contends that the fundamental drive behind their experience and activity derived not from the inspiration of "Yahweh's spirit (rûah)", which was irrational in nature, but from the power of "Yahweh's word (dābār)", which they grasped in the clear light of reason. In his view, the classical prophets avoided ascribing their experience to the "spirit of Yahweh" just because they wished to dissociate themselves from the popular prophets whose ecstatic behaviour was indeed related to the inspiration of the spirit. The "word of Yahweh", by contrast, which the classical prophets conceived of as the prime impulse of their mission, was dominated by a rational, sober and enlightened principle. Ezekiel's ecstatic behaviour indicates a regression to early prophecy, since the impact of the "spirit of Yahweh" returns as a salient characteristic of his behaviour and experiences—though with respect to his religious and moral standard this prophet, too, belongs to classical prophecy. It is Mowinckel's contention that the general course of the prophetic movement is an evolution from ecstatic intoxication to divine revelation in the sphere of quiet contemplation and mental clarity11). Interestingly enough, a similar conception—but second view H. Wheeler Robinson and A. Jepsen are to be listed. The latter, in his work Nabi (München, 1934), devoted to this subject, even attempted to distinguish between the prophets, who were only professional, ecstatic soothsayers and had branched off from ecstatic movements in northern Syria—and those great personalities who originally were not given any special designation, but after their warnings of destruction were fulfilled, were included among the prophets. The ("genuine") prophets represented the national religion, continued the old charismatic leadership, and appeared particularly in times of crisis. The great (classical) personalities, on the other hand, who did not call themselves prophets and only contended with the prophets, were never thrown into a state of ecstasy, and the word of God was delivered to them and transmitted by them in a clear and intellectualized manner. An admirable survey of these views is to be found in O. Eissfeldt's article, "The Prophetic Literature", in H. H. Rowley (ed.), The OT and Modern Study (Oxford, 1951), pp. 135-9. ‫״‬ ) Mowinckel's most outstanding studies on this subject are: "The 'Spirit' and the "Word‫ ׳‬in the Pre-exilic Reforming Prophets", JBL 53 (1934), pp. 199-227;

as a result of an entirely independent line of reasoning—was also held by the Israeli scholar Y. Kaufmann. He maintains that the essential characteristic of Israelite prophecy (not necessarily of classical prophecy alone) is the proclamation of the "word of Yahweh". The effect of the "spirit of Yahweh" on people, which leads them to a state of ecstasy, is regarded in the Old Testament not as the cause of prophecy but, at the very most, as a by-product of prophetical experience. "The word of God is not the outcome of the spirit, but rather the spirit is the outcome of the word of God" 1 2 ). I would argue that the two opposing views mentioned above— both the one which claims that the ecstatic element was a determining factor even in classical prophecy, and the one which totally denies the existence of such an element in that prophecy, are rather wide of the mark. And that, because both the opposing views hold germs of truth, which means that neither of the views by itself presents the whole truth. There was an ecstatic, hallucinative, irrational element in the classical prophets' mode of action, but it also had a rational and lucid sober-mindedness. Only we need not imagine that these two features materialized at one and the same time, for in the activity of every prophet they were detached from each other by a certain span of time. The prophetic experience itself was certainly ecstatic in character, obscure and irrational, and, to all appearances, the classical prophets underwent it mostly in the form of dreams (in the early prophecy it probably was not connected with this form alone) 13). But the literary expression which was given to this ex"Ecstatic Experience and Rational Elaboration in O T Prophecy", AcOr 13 (1935), pp. 264-291; "Postscript", JBL 56 (1937), pp. 261-265; Die Erkenntnis Gottes bei den alttestamentlichen Propheten (Oslo, 1942). See also Eissfeldt, pp. 139-141, where several additional references are made. 12 ) Y. Kaufmann, Tôl'dôt Hā^Emûnāh HaYišreēlít 1, pp. 511-30 (the quoted sentence is from p. 528). This part of Kaufmann's work was first printed in 1938, but the ideas were formulated several years before. It is therefore obvious that the two scholars were at work on this problem almost at the same time. Indeed, Kaufmann does not avail himself in this context of Mowinckel's studies (while it goes without saying that Mowinckel, for his part, did not make use of Kaufmann's writings). Perhaps it would not be an exaggeration to say that, as far as Kaufmann is concerned, his view is at least in some way a transformation (phrased, of course, in terms of modern biblical research) of the old rationalistic definition which Maimonides gave to the phenomenon of prophecy (Guide for the Perplexed, II, 36, 38). 13 ) For the dream as the principal, if not the only, ecstatic form which remained to the classical prophets of all the early prophecy's modes of exstatic activity, see, for the present, the comments I made in my aforementioned book Teqûpôt Û-Môsâdôt BaMiqrā‫'־‬, pp. 329-31. I have already pointed out there, that he who

perience is certainly sober, clear and rational. There should be no doubt that at the time the prophet sat down to commit his words to writing and to set his experience in a literary-artistic form, he was already liberated from the "trance" which had siezed him at the moments of the experience. The time of writing was of necessity one of mental clarity and lucidity, when the prophet had to struggle with the literary idiom, which calls for precision and polish. Thus, it was the use of the literary medium, which distinguished the classical from the early prophets, that also increased—if indeed it did not altogether determine—the rational and intellectualized basis of the verbal expression which the classical prophets had to provide for the "word of G o d " (in the case of the early prophets, the span of time which separated the prophetic experience from the oral pronouncement of the "word of Yahweh" may have contributed to the intelligibility of their addresses). IV Still another feature which typifies classical prophecy is that it reveals a particular system of values and an extraordinary moral vision. These qualities, by virtue of which the classical prophets have transcended their own time, deserve special discussion, which may be reserved for another occasion. states "I saw Yahweh standing by the altar" (Am. ix 1), or "I saw Yahweh seated on a throne, high and exalted" (Isa. vi 1), or other visions of this sort, only testifies that he was not in a state of sober-mindedness and lucidity.

T H E

P U R P O S E O F

O F

T H E

T H E

" E D I T O R I A L

B O O K

O F

F R A M E W O R K "

H A G G A I

1

)

by R. A. MASON Oxford

The aim of this article is a strictly limited one. It is to look again briefly at the so-called "editorial framework" of the book of Haggai and ask afresh whether there can be detected within it any discernible exegetical purpose, by which we may decide whether there is here early commentary on, and interpretation of, the ministry and oracles of the prophet. Clearly, in so brief a space, we cannot conduct anything like as intensive and thorough an examination of the material as Beuken has done 2) as to the nature and identity of the circles in which the tradition was moulded and passed on, nor even offer an adequate criticism of his conclusions. But if we are able to ask what was being attempted and achieved in this material, we should be in a better position from which to offer such criticism or even to offer different conclusions where such might be deemed appropriate. Most commentators have agreed that the material within which the oracles of Haggai have been "sandwiched", with its datings, its introductory formulae, its report on the effect of the preaching on the hearers and references to the prophet in the third person as "Haggai the prophet", cannot be the work of Haggai himself, but must come from an editor, who is responsible for the final form of the book. One most notable dissentient from this view is Eissfeldt who, without quite ruling out the work of an editor, questions whether Haggai may not have chosen the third person form "to enhance the complete objectivity of his report", and he believes in any case that the report as we have it "was written down very soon after the event" 3 ). It will be argued here that certain differences between the 1

) A paper read to the Winter Meeting of the Society for Old Testament Study, London, December 1975. 2 ) W. A. M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8 (Assen, 1967). 3 ) Einleitung in das Alte Testament (3rd edn., Tübingen, 1964), § 58; Ε. Tr. The Old Testament: an Introduction (Oxford, 1965), pp. 428-9.

oracles and the framework in terminology, style and outlook, testify against Eissfeldt's view, without prejudging the question of the date of such editorial activity. The material which we are here treating as belonging to the editorial framework is i 1, 3, 12, 13a, 14, 15, ii 1 , 2 (probably), 10, 20. It may be that, if an argument of Beuken (to be discussed below) is right, we should include ii 4 as coming from the editor, although otherwise disputed material from the oracles will not be discussed. The danger of the circular argument is ever-present. Verse 5 of chapter ii is usually regarded as a gloss. Whether it was from the editor of the rest of the framework can only be decided by a comparison of the contents and outlook of the two, a comparison we shall not attempt here. Of the other verses mentioned, i 15a is usually held to be a misplaced introduction to the oracles of ii 15-19, and v. 15b is taken to introduce the oracle in ii 1-9. No one can treat any aspect of the books of Haggai and Zechariah i-viii without being deeply indebted to Beuken's work, even where he may find himself questioning some of the conclusions. Λ brief survey, by way of reminder, of Beuken's position may therefore be in place at the outset. He believes that the final forms of the books of Haggai and Zechariah i-viii stem from a "Chronistic milieu", for much of the terminology and many of the ideas reflect those to be found in the writings of the Chronicler. Among these are: the same concern for the temple and its ritual, concern for the continuance of the Davidic line, the view of the prophets as "messengers", the concept of God "stirring u p " the spirit of leaders and people, the association of the "spirit" of God with prophecy and the setting of the rebuilding of the temple in a covenant context. It is important to stress Beuken's own phrase, a "Chronistic milieu". He does not make a simple identification with the Chronicler, partly because he recognizes elements in the material that are derived from other sources which express its own peculiarities, and partly because he recognizes that behind what is termed the "Chronicler" the outlook of various groups may be represented (pp. 35 f.). We turn, then, to consider some of the distinguishing features of the editorial framework. We note first the use of the formula bâyāb debar-ybwb beyad baggay hannābP, which occurs three times, in i 1, 3, and ii 1. Perhaps not too much should be made of its use, for twice also we have the alternative formula bāyāb debar-ybwb ‫י־‬el-baggay bant1ābP in ii 10, 20. Beuken stresses that the idea of the word of Yahweh

coming "by the hand o f " a particular prophet is found only twice in older texts, but is characteristic of the Deuteronomic writings and those of the Chronicler (p. 28). He cites four examples of its use in the books of Kings. In fact it occurs there eleven times 4), and only four times in the Chronicler's writings 5). One of these is a parallel to one of the Kings references, while three refer to the prophets generally. This is rather different from its use in Kings where it is always associated with a particular prophet. Of course, many of the references in Kings are to prophetic words spoken to kings of the northern kingdom in passages which have no parallel in Chronicles, but when Beuken says that in this, as in so much else, the Chronicler is influenced by the Deuteronomists, it is necessary to observe that the two use the phrase rather differently. Where the Chronicler does link the phrase "by the hand o f " to a particular individual, it is to Moses, a use which appears four times, always in reference to Moses as lawgiver 6). This usage of the phrase is found only once in Kings 7). However, where the phrase is used much more of Moses is in the Priestly writing, where it occurs thirteen times 8 ) and where it is used not only of Moses as law-giver but as transmitter of the instructions concerning the manufacture of the tabernacle and the order of its ritual. Indeed, it is used in this last connection most frequently. Of course, we cannot speak of "influence" between the Priestly writers and the editorial framework of the Book of Haggai, since we can date neither. At the most we could say that it might indicate a similarity of outlook between those responsible for each, whether they arrive at that outlook independently, from a common source, or whether both works issue from similar circles. If, then, there is any significance in the use of this phrase three times in the framework, it may express either a concern to show that what happened with the rebuilding of the temple was a fulfilment of the prophetic word, showing history viewed as linked cause and effect, the prophetic word of Yahweh and its fulfilment, a concern which characterizes both the Deuteronomists and the Chronicler but is expressed here in a way which accords more with Deuteronomistic 4

) 1 Kings xii 15, XV 29, xvi 12, 17, 34, xvii 16; 2 Kings ix 36, xiv 25, xvii 13, 23, xxi 10. 2 ‫ף‬ Chr. χ 15 ( = 1 Kings xii 15), xxix 25, xxxvi 15; Nch. ix 30 (29). e ) 2 Chr. xxxiii 8, xxxiv 14, xxxv 6; Neh. ix 14. 7 ) 1 Kings viii 53, 56. 8 ) Ex. ix 35, xxxv 29; Ixv. viii 36, χ 11, xxvi 46; Nu. iv 37, 45, ix 23, χ 13, xv 23, xvi 40, xxvii 23, xxxvi 13.

usage, or a concern to draw a parallel between the establishment of the first temple and that of the second, with both resting on an authorizing word of Yah weh spoken through his chosen messenger of the time. Another feature of the framework is its concentration upon the prophetic word spoken to the leaders, Zerubbabel and Joshua. In the oracles themselves it appears to be the community as a whole which is addressed. There is a final oracle in ii 21-23, addressed by Haggai exclusively to Zerubbabel, who is addressed as "governor of Judah". There is also in ii 4 a call to Zerubbabel and Joshua, alongside those who are addressed as "the people of the land". Beuken has argued, however, that ii 4 represents the work of the editor, at least to the point of its being a modification of an oracle originally addressed to the whole community. Usually ii 2-9 is divided into two oracles, ii 2-4 (or 5 according to whether v. 5 is regarded as gloss or not), and ii 6-9. Beuken maintains that vv. 6-9 constitute an answer to the hesitations expressed in v. 3, and that it is thus v. 4 which is intrusive. The editor has adapted the original oracle to an "installation to office" form, on the pattern of those found in the Chronicler's work, as in 1 Chr. xxii 11-16, and xxviii 10-20, David's installation of Solomon to the office of temple builder. Common to these are the injunction ha%aq and the imperative Casū, and the promise of God's presence with the one being installed in office (Beuken, pp. 50 ff.). The parallel may be justified, but it is worth noting that the type of oracle Beuken finds here is also to be found in the Deuteronomistic writings, e.g. Dt. xxxi; Jos. i, χ 25; 2 S. xi, etc., while its occurrence in other prophetic material (e.g. Is. XXXV 4), and its echo of some Psalm passages (e.g. Pss. xxvii 14, xxxi 25 (24)), may suggest a common source to them all in Israel's worship. However, whether we accept Beuken's analysis of ii 3-9 or not, the fact remains that the framework places much greater emphasis on the role of the two leaders than the oracles themselves do. Beuken says that it is a feature of the Chronicler's work that the prophetic word is always addressed to the king whose response becomes determinative for that of the whole community (p. 32). He quotes Westermann to support him : The astonishing thing now is that all of these speeches [i.e. the prophetic speeches in the books of Chronicles], with one exception (ch. 24:20), are actually prophetic speeches directed to the king 9 )! 9 ) C. Wcstermann, Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech (London, 1967), p. 166, E.Tr. of Grundformen prophetischer Rede (Munich, 1960).

This is impressive until we carry out a similar investigation of all those passages, already referred to, in the books of Kings, which contain the formula "by the hand of . . . " . There also, with the exception of Elijah's word concerning the cruise of oil, all are directed at or to the ruling kings. Nevertheless, while it would be false to limit this concern of the framework to any exclusive connection with the Chronicler, the fact of this emphasis on the leadership remains of interest and importance. The pedigree of both is emphasised by the constant repetition of their descent (a factor which may suggest that ii 2 belongs to the same hand), a descent which, according to the Chronicler, would make a Davidide of Zerubbabel (1 Chr. iii 16), and a descendant of the pre-exilic line of Levitical high priests of Joshua (1 Chr. vi 14). The divine purpose for the community is announced to the leaders and effected through their obedience. Both are placed alongside in the framework without comment on their respective roles and this, together with the retention of the oracle concerning the messiahship of Zerubbabel in ii 21-23, might be held to support Eissfeldt's view that the framework is not likely to be so very much later than the events it records. It is otherwise in Zech. i-viii where there is more conscious discussion of their respective roles and some suggestion of growing emphasis on the figure of the high priest. But what is of interest in the framework of the book of Haggai, is that the sole function of Zerubbabel, for all that he is termed "governor", is the building of the temple. Unlike the last oracle (ii 21-23) no political significance is given to his office whatever, and here one is reminded of the role of David in the books of Chronicles. Is there here a similar reinterpretation of the messianic hope to that of the Chronicler, of which P. R. Ackroyd could say, The Davidic hope, taken out of history, is embodied in temple and cultus, ordained by David, and now renewed . . . 10)? But if there is particular interest in the leadership, there is no exclusive concern with them alone. The community as a whole is linked with them by its response to the prophetic word, a response described in i 12-14. They are three times described as köl spirit hâ'âm in i 12, 14, and ii 2. The term še>ērit can mean purely a "residue", but from its use in the prophetic books it had evidently acquired a special theological overtone, for it is used there in contexts of both threat 10

) P. R. Ackroyd, "History and Theology in the Chronicler", Concordia Theological Monthly 38 (1967), pp. 501-7.

of judgement and promise of deliverance. Its use here suggests that the community of returned exiles is seen as those who, having survived the judgement of the exile, have now returned as the nucleus of the new Israel, heirs to the old prophetic promise of salvation. Beuken points out that it is strange that the phrase does not occur in i 1 whereas it does in the corresponding superscription of ii 1 (p. 29). But could this be a deliberate usage? May the editor be expressing the opinion that it was the prophetic word of Yahweh and their response to it which constituted them as the true Israel, the genuine "remnant"? This response is described in terms of their "listening to the voice of the L O R D their God". This is sharply evocative of the Deuteronomic phrase, "If you listen to the voice of the L O R D your God . . .", with its assurance that experience of the covenant blessings depended upon such obedience, a phrase found often in both Deuteronomy, the Deuteronomistic history and the Deuteronomistic sections of the book of Jeremiah. It is closely paralleled in the framework with another characteristic Deuteronomistic phrase, "the people feared before the L O R D " . It is interesting to observe that in the present arrangement of the book of Haggai the oracles warning of judgement in chapter i are followed by oracles promising deliverance and blessing in chapter ii, the two pivoting around the response of the people to the word of Yahweh, a response which is thus seen as critical. Indeed, this response is pictured in some sense as a work of spiritual renewal by the use of the phrase, "And the L O R D stirred up the spirit of . . . " both leaders and people. In spite of Beuken's insistence that this is an entirely Chronistic term (p. 31), we may disregard its use in the books of Chronicles in this context, since it is there used exclusively of Yahweh's stirring up of the spirit of foreign powers to act either against or for his people ‫ ) ״‬. Its appearance in Ezr. i 5 is different, but could well be dependent upon its use in the book of Haggai. This seems, in fact, to be a phrase peculiar to the framework, but one wonders if, with its suggestions of rousing from sleep or inactivity, something of the overtone of the idea of the arousing of the nation in Ezk. xxxvii, or even of the moral and spritual renewal of Ezk. xxxvi or Jer. xxxi 31 ff. may not be implicit. The result of this action of God upon the spirit of the whole community was their undertaking of the work of the reconstruction 11

) 1 Chr. ν 26; 2 Chr. xxi 16, xxxvi 22.

of the temple, which is described in i 14 in the following way: wayyäböT! wayyalaíū melā*kāh bebēt yhwh) The use of the term melā*kāh is of interest, for, while it can be used of work of any kind, it is employed very often in connection with work upon the temple. It is used in the Priestly writing particularly of the work connected with the tabernacle, and again in both Kings and Chronicles for the work of construction of Solomon's temple. Indeed, the terminology answers very closely to that found especially in Ex. xxxv f. where the enthusiastic response of the whole community is stressed: All the men and women, the people of Israel, whose hearts moved them to bring anything for the work (hamm^lâ^kāh) which Yahweh had commanded by Moses (beyad nwšēh) to be done ([/aCasāt), brought it as their freewill offering to Yahweh (Ex. xxxv 29). . . . every one whose heart stirred him up to conic *el-bamtu*1ā1‫־‬kāh la1" sôΊ "δtab (Ex. xxxvi 2) 12). While we have ruled out the legitimacy of any attempt to trace literary dependence between these two sources, we may nevertheless ask whether it may not be that the editorial framework of the book of Haggai views the rebuilding of the temple as a parallel to and in some sense a fulfilment of the building of the first, and to have come from circles which invested the temple with the same kind of theological significance as those from which the Priestly writing came. The stress in ii 4 on the promise of God's "presence" in the midst of his community answers closely to the thought of the Priestly writing of God "tabernacling" among his people in the sanctuary. Of this view, J. P. Hyatt has said that it accords well "with the promise of Ezk. 37:27: My dwelling place shall be with them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people" 13). Nor can it be very far from the outlook of the Chronicler who, while he may have stressed more the divine transcendence, yet, by his emphasis on the temple, its personnel and its cultus, saw it, in the words of Myers, as "the 12

) The point made on p. 415 must again be stressed, that there can be no instance of any literary dependence here, since we cannot be sure of the relative dates of the Priestly Writing and the editorial framework of the book of Haggai. This is particularly the case with Ex. xxxvi-xl, since they present several peculiarities which have led many commentators to suggest that they represent a later strand of the Priestly Writing. Cp. B. S.Childs, Exodus (London, 1974), pp. 529-37. 13 ) J. P. Hyatt, Exodus (London, 1971), p. 262.

eternal trysting place between the Lord and his people . . . " 1 4 ) . It is time to return to the question with which this article began. From all this, is there any discernible exegetical purpose to be found in the framework of the book of Haggai? Must we not say that any thorough-going eschatological prophet raises problems for those who follow him? What happens when the crisis of history which he invested with such significance comes and goes without proving as final as he foretold? One may cast it still farther into the future, like the final stabs of the last two verses of the book of Daniel. Or one may reinterpret it in a way that seeks to relate it to the continuing life of the people of God, to show that each new crisis of history gains in significance and presents sharper challenge in the light of the final crisis which is still awaited. Is it not some such process as this which must explain to some extent the emergence of the two outlooks of post-exilic Judaism of which O. Plöger has written in his book, Theokratie und Eschatologie? ÏS ). We do not know enough of the history following 515 B.C. to say with confidence what happened to the community in Jerusalem under the leadership of Zerubbabel. But it would scarcely be rash to assume that not all that Haggai predicted immediately followed the restoration of the temple. Is the editorial framework of the book a first attempt to relate them to the situation which did emerge? In one sense, we might perhaps describe this attempt at a reinterpretation of the oracles of the prophet along the lines of what might be called "realized eschatology". More accurately, perhaps, we should say that their eschatological hopes here receive a partial "theocratic" interpretation. If not all the signs which the prophet foretold of the new age had yet appeared, nevertheless its day had dawned. The completion of the new temple marked the fulfilment of all the hopes and promise implicit in the first. The returned community had become the "remnant" of prophetic promise, constituted as such by the fulfilment of the divine word given by the prophet and its renewed hope rested securely on the basis of that divine word. Its continuance was assured by the presence of God in the temple in their midst mediated to them by the cultus, and its authenticity was guaranteed by the divinely ordained leadership which characterised the restored community. The significance of that leadership was not 14

) J. M. Myers, I Chronicles (Garden City, New York, 1965), p. lxviii. ) (2nd edn., Neukirchen, 1962), F‫״‬Tr. Theocracy and Escha/o/ogy (Oxford, 1968).

15

in any crude resurgence of the old politico-messianic hopes, but in the emergence of a people of God, restored to a right relationship with him, gladly serving him, renewed by him. Meanwhile, the editor calls on his contemporaries to show by their attitude to the temple and its service, the same spirit of willing obedience to the word of Yahweh as the contemporaries of the prophet Haggai showed, a call underlined by the reminder that Haggai was Yahweh's "messenger" (i 13), a description of the prophetic office to be found indeed in the Chronicler, but also in Second Isaiah (xliv 26) and, above all, in the prophetic collection known to us as the book of Malachi. This present fulfilment of Haggai's preaching did not exclude a greater, future hope. His eschatological promises were preserved still and honoured. But the future outcome could be awaited with confidence and hope because of the fulfilment of them they were already experiencing in the present. Such an understanding of the framework does not necessarily imply a very late date for it. It does not need to have been tied as closely to the "Chronicler" as Beuken suggests. It was open to wider influences, yet it could well represent the viewpoint of a group farther upstream, but in the same waters which nourished the Chronicler. Are there indications that this group, and those among whom the Priestly writing must have been crystallising, had many things in common? The absence of any signs of uncertainty over the dual role of Joshua and Zerubbabel would point to an earlier stage in the development of the tradition than that of the final editing of Zech. i-viii 16). It may be added in conclusion that such an early exegesis of the oracles of Haggai would not be without its interest and value as a guide for the continuing task of the exegesis of earlier prophecies, by which their relevance and importance might be demonstrated and related to the continuing life of the people of God in every age. 16 ) It should be noted, however, that if Hag. ii 2 and 4 both belong to the framework, there is no record in the oracles themselves that Haggai addressed such a person as Joshua the High Priest at all. His appearance alongside Zerubbabel in the framework would then suggest that a process of elevation of the priesthood had begun which was to be carried farther by the time of the final editing of Zech. i-viii.

P O S S E S S I O N IN

T R A N C E

P R E - E X I L I C

A N D

P R O P H E C Y

I S R A E L

by SIMON B. P A R K E R Boston, Massachusetts

The so-called ecstatic prophets of 1 Sam. χ ff., xix 20 ff. are still generally seen as representing a stage in the development of Israelite prophecy 1 ). However, it has often been pointed out that there is no evidence to suggest that they gave oracles of any kind, and some scholars are attempting to understand Israelite prophecy without reference to ecstasy 2). But no alternative account of ecstasy has yet been suggested 3). Beginning with a re-examination of the two Samuel passages the following study seeks to characterize the phenomena reflected there by reference to recent cross-cultural studies of trance states, to suggest a historical context and function for such a behavior, and, finally, to clarify its relationship to other phenomena in ancient Israel, especially prophecy. I Of the many texts which are often cited as referring to "ecstasy" two are by far the most explicit. In the first, 1 Sam. χ 5-7, Samuel, having anointed Saul nāgîd, is telling him what will happen to him on his way home : 1

) See e.g. G. Fohrer, History of Israelite Religion (Nashville and New York, 1972; London, 1973), p. 225 = Geschichte der israelitischen Religion (Berlin, 1969), p. 224; J. Bright, A History of Israel (2nd edn, Philadelphia and London, 1972), p. 182; B. W. Anderson, Understanding the Old Testament (3rd edn, Englewood Cliffs, 1975), pp. 228 ff. 2 ) E.g. R. Rendtorff, "Reflections on the Early History of Prophecy in Israel", Journal for Theology and Church 4 (1967), pp. 14-34 (originally ZThK 59 [1962], pp. 145-67). V. Eppstein, "Was Saul also among the Prophets?", Ζ AW 81 (1969), pp. 287-304 concludes that the history of Israelite prophecy should be reassessed in the recognition that the two Samuel passages are irrelevant. V. W. Rabe, BASOR 221 (Feb., 1976), p. 126, thinks that this is now a general trend. 3 ) Resort to the category "shamanism" in some recent studies has not distinguished prophecy and ecstasy: A. S. Kapelrud, "Shamanistic Features in the Old Testament", in C. M. Edsman (ed.), Studies in Shamanism (Stockholm, 1967), pp. 90-96; K. Goldammer, "Elemente des Schamanismus im alten Testament", Studies in the History of Religion (Leiden, 1972), pp. 266-85.

. . . you will come upon a group of ^bî^îm on their way down from the high place, led by lute and drum and pipe and harp, and they will be mitnabb^im. Then a spirit of Yahweh will overwhelm you, so that (you will) hìtnabbîtā with them, being transformed into a different person. When these significant events happen to you, do whatever comes to hand, for God will be with you. The fulfillment of Samuel's prediction is summarized in verse 10. In the second passage, 1 Sam. xix 20 ff., Saul, having learned of David's whereabouts, sends messengers to take him, but when they arrive they see the nebPtm nibb^im, "and a spirit of God came upon Saul's messengers, so that they too yitnabb^û". The same happens with two subsequent sets of messengers (verse 21). Finally Saul goes in person, "and a spirit of God came upon him too, so that he continued on his way wayyitnabbe' (or emended: wehitnabbē'‫׳‬y until he arrived where David was (verse 23). Then he too stripped off his clothes, and he too yitnabbP in Samuel's presence, and fell down, lying naked all that day and night (verse 24a). What are these nebPim, and what is meant by the verb hitnabbē' (nibbā' in xix 20, apparently not distinguished in meaning)? In the first passage the behavior is accompanied, perhaps fostered, by music. It is interpreted as a radical transformation of the personality, and may confer extraordinary powers on the person so affected. According to the second it may entail stripping off one's clothes, and may issue in a coma. In both its onset is described as an invasion, or at least a visitation, by a divine spirit. It is a group behavior, and is contagious. It seems clear that we have to do with some kind of trance state, or altered state of consciousness. But on the basis of recent field studies and comparative studies it is possible to suggest a more precise definition of the behavior reflected in these passages. Several such studies were carried out under the directorship of Professor Erika Bourguignon of the Department of Anthropology of Ohio State University between 1963 and 1968, and some of the results have been published under her editorship as Religion, Altered States of Consciousness and Social Change (Columbus, 1973). As the title implies, the partieular focus of the work is those altered states which are institutionalized within a religious framework, and the relations of such states to social or cultural change. Both foci will be of value to us in our attempt to understand the experience attributed to Saul in 1 Samuel. Bourguignon distinguishes two types of trance as coming within

the purview of these studies : "possession trance", referring to "states interpreted by the societies in which they occur as due to possession by spirits", and "trance", referring to states not thus interpreted, and most typically involving hallucinations or visions (p. 12). Possession trance is further characterized by L. Greenbaum in the same volume as referring to . . . a condition in which a person is believed to be inhabited by the spirit of another person or a supernatural being. During this "possession" by a spirit other than his own, the person is in an altered state of consciousness, evidenced by one or more of the following : talking and acting like the inhabiting spirit, lapsing into a coma-like state, speaking unintelligibly, exhibiting physical symptoms such as twitching, wild dancing, frothing at the mouth, and so on. Upon regaining his original identity, the person generally retains no conscious memory of the activity of the spirit. Possession trance may be an individual or a group phenomenon. It may be induced by drugs, music, or other methods external to the individual, or it may be a spontaneous manifestation by the person possessed. It may be a phenomenon restricted to a particular status or role (for example, a diviner, medium, priest) or it may occur at random in the society. In all cases however, the phenomenon is accepted within the society as a trance induced by a spirit entering the person possessed, and not as an individual psychological aberration (pp. 42-3). Visionary trance on the other hand is generally a covert, passive experience. It acquires social significance only when the visions are recorded or communicated, which is possible after such a trance, since the visions are generally remembered, especially when given religious significance in the society (Bourguignon, p. 15). The significance of the society's interpretation of either phenomenon is that the interpretation in turn structures the behavior and experience of the trance state 4). According to this typology the Samuel passages clearly refer to possession trance, and that is the term that will be used through the rest of this article 5 ). But Bourguignon makes another important dis4 ) Bourguignon, pp. 13-14. Cf. L. C. May, American Anthropologist 58 (1956), p. 90. δ ) The complaint that "ecstasy is a word which has been sorely overworked" had already been voiced by A. Guillaume, Prophecy and Divination (London, 1938), p. 290 (cf. p. 107). H. W. Robinson preferred the term "possession" in his InspiraHon and Revelation in the Old Testament (Oxford, 1946), p. 180. V. W. Rabe claims "spirit-possession" is the "proper category" — BASOR 221 (Feb., 1976), pp. 125-6.

tinction, which can be exploited immediately. Possession trance may be mediumistic—that is, mediating a message from the spirit world to an audience—or personal and compensatory (p. 336). As noted at the beginning of this paper, there is no suggestion that the "prophecy" of our passages involves any communication between God and man, or between persons. It appears not to be mediumistic. As this point, something must be said about the Hebrew terminology. Jepsen, followed by Guillaume, tabulated the occurrences of the nifal and hitbpael of the root nby to show that for both forms the meaning "rave" in earlier texts gradually gave way to the meaning "prophesy" in later texts 6). Johnson, making the same distinction in meaning, has warned against being "led astray by the use of the verbal form [hitnabbe']", stating that in places it "has no immediate connection with prophecy of any kind", though the only two such places he allows are Jer. xxix 26 and 1 Sam. xviii 10 7). It is generally acknowledged that the verb may sometimes mean "rave": disagreement arises over which occurrence requires which meaning. Johnson's warning has, however, been ignored to the extent that in any given passage, while one meaning may be claimed as primary, the other is often assumed as implied. On the basis of what has been said thus far in this paper, I would argue that in the two Samuel passages cited both the nifal and the hithpael of the verb mean: "to be in, or to fall into, a possession trance", and that they have nothing to do with prophecy or divination. Further, it is the working hypothesis of this article that for every example of these verbal forms the context only requires either one meaning or the other, never both. Such mutually exclusive definitions of the two meanings pose problems for understanding the semantic development of the word, otherwise rather obvious. But if possession trance was first known to Israel from Phoenicia, where its function was mediumistic 8 ), it would be natural for the Israelites to refer to it by the same word with which they referred to mediumistic activity in their own culture, namely nb'—even though its function in Israel was generally unrelated to prophecy. «) A. Jepsen, Nabi (Munich, 1934), pp. 7-8; A. Guillaume, pp. 114-15. ') A. R. Johnson, The Cultic Prophetin Ancient Israel (2nd edn, Cardiff, 1962), pp. 63 and 17. But on Jer. xxix 26 see below. 8 ) The best pre-Hellenistic evidence for this remains the behavior of the servant of the prince of Byblos in the Report of Wen-Amun, dated to the eleventh century. See AN ET (3rd edn), p. 26; and most recently, with commentary, H. Goedicke, The Report of Wenamun (Baltimore, 1975), pp. 53-5.

Be that as it may, it is a corollary of the preceding argument that the noun, nāb?, can also refer to a person in, or subject to, possession trance; and, specifically, that the persons encountered by Saul were not "prophets" (seers, diviners, or mediums of any kind), but simply a group in a possession trance 9 ). II If possession trance in Israel was not mediumistic, what was its function? Bourguignon generalizes that possession trances may provide subjective, expressive compensation for personal or social stresses through the emotional satisfactions provided by the possession trance experience itself; or they may provide objective instrumental compensation through a change in status resulting from the social recognition accorded the phenomenon (p. 328). " T h e cultural meaning supplied for these states and the institutional framework within which they operate vary from society to society, and thus the specific functions they fulfil vary also" (p. 3). The two passages discussed above perform different functions in their present literary contexts. 1 Sam. xix 20-24 shows how on a particular occasion David was protected from Saul by the latter's (and his messengers') succumbing to possession trance. This is an ad hoc use of the trance phenomenon in the larger narrative, and gives no hint of the general function of the trance in the society. In 1 Sam. χ 5-7 Saul's possession trance serves in the larger context as a confirming sign for him that he is the designated ruler of Israel—confirming, because possession trance is here interpreted as possession by a spirit of Yahweh in whose name he has just been anointed. Of course, for those who repeat and hear the story it is a confirming sign for them that Saul was indeed (or had been) Yahweh's appointee. At this point another text can be introduced which appears to refleet a similar phenomenon: Num. xi 16-17 and 24-5. Here Yahweh

9

) The Akkadian terminology is similarly ambiguous. Though some occurrences of mahtt seem to mean "behave wildly" (y. S. D. Walters, JBL 89 [1970], p. 79, n. 5) and an Akkadian text from Ugarit refers to such behavior by mahhū (v. J. J. M. Roberts, " A New Parallel to I Kings 18: 2 8 - 2 9 " , J B L 89 [1970], pp. 76-7), there seem to be no adequate reasons for seeing this connotation in the verb or cognate noun referring to prophecy at Mari: W. L. Moran, Bib. 50 (1969), pp. 27-8; S. D. Walters, JBL 89 (1970), p. 79. A. Malamat had already contrasted the alleged etymology of the word ("raving, frenzied") with the "sober, purposeful statements" of the Mari prophets in VTS 15 (1966), pp. 210-11.

tells Moses to gather seventy men from among Israel's elders 1υ), and to have these men stand with him at the tent of meeting. Yahweh says he will then come down and speak with Moses, and transfer some of Moses's spirit on to the men, so that they can help Moses bear the burden of (governing) the people: he will not have to manage on his own (verses 16-17). Moses does what he has been told to do, Yahweh does his part, taking some of Moses's spirit and setting it on the elders, "and as the spirit alighted on them, ìvajjitnabbeÌû·, but they never did again" (verse 25). Here we have a group being possessed by a spirit—probably not to be understood as the spirit of another person, as described in the ethnographic literature, but "some o f " the spirit which Yahweh had conferred upon Moses. The situation does not suggest or require communication of any kind u ) . The group's response to the transfer of the spirit seems to function as a confirming sign of their appointment to the new central offices 12). The ruler is portrayed as operating entirely on his own up to this point. He needs an administration. The candidates are chosen in the first instance on the basis of their ascribed roles ("elders"), but the final qualification is possession trance, here interpreted as possession by the same spirit with which the ruler is endowed. This is to be contrasted with Ex. xviii 13-27, where a similar administrative problem is treated much more rationally : the qualifications for office are character references, the offices themselves are structurally defined (see especially verses 21-2) 13). Clearly this reflects a later, more sophisticated understanding of government than the Numbers passage, where the "monarch" is portrayed as being still basically dependent on traditional authority ("elders"), although pos-

10 ) Their further designation as sôfrîm ("officers" or "clerks") is an expression of the later recognition that elders once used to perform public duties now handled by administrative officials. See M. Noth, Numbers (London and Philadelphia, 1968), p. 87 = Das vierte Buch Mose : Numeri (Göttingen, 1966), p. 78. 11 ) Noth found this "very strange in the present context", and assumed that the purpose of the present passage must be, not the relief of Moses' burden, which is developed in a "much more pertinent way" in Ex. xviii 13-27, but "the derivation of ecstatic 'prophecy' from the 'spirit' of Moses" (Noth, Numbers, p. 89 = Numeri, pp. 79-80). This necessitates emending the M T at the end of verse 25 to rfíàyāsûpú, leading to the translation: "and they did not cease (prophesying)". 12 ) N. Snaith, ed. Leviticus and Numbers (London, 1967), p. 232; J. Lindblom, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (2nd edn, Oxford and Philadelphia, 1963), p. 101, n. 80. 13 ) For a recent discussion of the tradition history of this passage see B. S. Childs, The Book of Exodus (Philadelphia, 1974) = Exodus. A Commentary (London, 1974), pp. 321 ff.

session trance seems to be an additional prerequisite for participation in the new form of government. It is also significant that in Num. xi the elders experienced the trance on this occasion "for the first and only time" (NEB). Possession trance often serves to designate persons for, and initiate them into, roles which they then normally perform without resort to such abnormal states—thus Nuer prophets 14) and Nguni diviners 15). Moreover, after initiation the latter enjoy greater power and prestige than they had previously, operating as "professionals, engaged . . . in serious and socially significant enterprises" 16). Similarly, in Haitian peasant society where "possession is a prerequisite for becoming an initiate and later a priest", the behavior confers "power in the real world outside the ritual context . . ." 17). I suggest that with the growth of monarchy in Israel there developed a demand for persons with new kinds of qualifications for new kinds of offices. Traditional authority, with its ascribed status based on the lineage system, must often have seemed inadequate, or at least inappropriate. On the other hand, achieved status and rational criteria for selecting persons to office were initially unperceived, or at least undefined. People whose expectations lay entirely within the old, traditional order were disoriented by the new. At this critical, transitional stage possession trance was adopted—perhaps from the more advanced, monarchic culture of Canaan/Phoenicia—and adapted as a means of bridging the gap between what we can see as two discontinuous, incommensurate systems; as a means of guaranteeing in Israelite eyes a person's endowment, and Yahweh's endorsement of him, for the role in question. This is not to claim that possession trance was a sufficient condition for entry into the king's service. In fact, there was probably considerable continuity between those of high traditional status and those who occupied the new positions of power in the developing royal administration—witness the elders of Num. xi, and the patronymics recorded for most of the royal officers in the lists of 2 Sam. viii 16-18, xx 23-6; 1 Ki. iv 1-6 (if these can be taken to be indicative of some traditional status). On the other hand many who experienced possession trance may not have acquired office —there is no suggestion that those encountered by Saul did so. But 14

) Ε. E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer Religion (Oxford, 1956), p. 44. ) J. Gussler, in Bourguignon, pp. 97 ff. le ) Gussler, p. 114. 17 ) E. Bourguignon, in M. E. Spiro (ed.), Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology (New York, 1965), pp. 56-7. 15

for such there was a more subjective benefit. The trance experience enabled them to transcend the disorientation, the confusion, the anxiety generated by the great changes in process, and to come to terms with the new order. For such people the group may have been an important element in the experience. In this respect perhaps the groups encountered by Saul may be compared with those in Ethiopia described by S. D. Messing, which served as "a catch-all for many psychological disturbances ranging from frustrated status ambition to actual mental illness", and in which the possession cult functioned "as a form of group therapy", the devotees forming "a close-knit social group in which they find security and recognition" 18). In any case, the trance in early monarchic Israel provided, in Bourguignon's terms, both objective, instrumental compensation, and subjective, expressive compensation. If the connection (made in both 1 Sam. χ and xix) between possession trance and the proverb: "Is Saul also among the nebPtmi" is sufficiently historical to permit the latter to be interpreted: "Is Saul really one of those who have experienced possession trance?" 19), we can now understand the peculiar force of the proverb. For to question SauPs experience of the trance would be to question his qualifications, and therefore his very legitimacy as king 20). But if his rule was being challenged through a saying which denied that he had been designated by possession trance, it is equally understandable that in response stories should be circulated that portrayed him as having indeed had that experience, both at his initial designation, and, as further confirmation, when persecuting David. At the same time the composers of these accounts turned the very ammunition of the enemy to their own account. For they used Saul's experience of the trance as the occasion when the proverb used against him had been coined, thus reinterpreting it to mean the opposite of what it had originally intended; 18 ) S. D. Messing, " G r o u p Therapy and Social Status in the Zar Cult of Ethiopia", American Anthropologist 60 (1958), pp. 1120-26. 19 ) Originally implying a negative answer, and coined by Saul's enemies, David's supporters, as persuasively argued by J. Sturdy, "The Original Meaning of 'Is Saul also among the Prophets?' 1 Sam χ 11, 12; xix 24", VT 20 (1970), pp. 206-13. Cf. V. Eppstein, "Was Saul also among the Prophets?", ZAW 81 (1969), 287-304, who cautions that the explanation of the proverb must date from a later time (cf. Β. C. Birch, "The Development of the Tradition on the Anointing of Saul in 1 Sam 9:1-10:16", JBL 90 [1971], pp. 55-68). Contrast J. Lindblom, "Saul inter Prophets", AST I 9 (1973), pp. 30-41. 20 ) Cf. H. W. Hertzberg, I and II Samuel (London, 1964), p. 140 = Die Samuelbûcher (Göttingen, 1956), p. 108.

and even explained one of David's lucky escapes by having Saul seized by possession trance. But having identified the phenomenon of possession trance, and assigned it a general function on the basis of the evidence in 1 Sam. χ and Num. xi and in the light of comparative data, we must also now refer to the general theory which supports our connection of the trance with particular social and political developments, and consider the evidence for the history of the phenomenon. Again a general theoretical framework is provided by Bourguignon : Among . . . problems beyond the control of individuals arc the frcquently cataclysmic consequences of change—social, cultural, economic, and political. And when we consider the relationship of religion to change, its double role as a bulwark against change on the one hand and as a mediator or even initiator of change on the other, we often find that key individuals in this process experience altered states of consciousness (p. 4). And again: " T h e form possession trance takes in a given situation is . . . a response to cultural change, the behavior being modified as the belief system and the social structure change" 21). Whatever the origins of possession trance in Israel, it first appears to us as a group behavior, and in their present context the two Samuel references suggest some degree of institutionalization : the first group encountered by Saul are coming down from a bāmā, and Saul is directed toward them by Samuel, who appears to preside over the second group 22). These details suggest that either the traditional leadership or later prophetic circles harnessed, or aspired to harness, the developing phenomenon. In Num. xi 16-17, 24-5 the institutionalization of possession trance is explicit : specified persons have the experience on a specific occasion at a particular time and place only—and there the ruler presides. This is the more marked, when contrasted with the sequel in verses 26-9, a passage which has been appended to the earlier material of verses 24-5 23). In verse 26 it is explained that two of the seventy elders just spoken of as all having received some of Moses's 21 ) Bourguignon, p. 337. Cf. Κ. Goldammer's use of La Barre (The Ghost Dance : The Origins of Religion [New York, 1972]) : K. Goldammer, "Elemente des Schamanismus . . ." (see above, n. 3), pp. 278-9. 22 ) For a prophet presiding over a seance in which others are possessed see the ceremony described by Ε. E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer Religion (Oxford, 1956), pp. 34-8. 23 ) M. Noth, Numbers, p. 90 = Numeri, p. 80.

spirit were in fact still in the camp. The spirit now alights on them, and they fall into a possession trance there in the camp. When word is brought to Moses, Joshua immediately says: "Stop them!" (verse 28). Moses replies: "Are you jealous for me? I wish that all Yahweh's people were subject to possession trance, that Yahweh would set his spirit on them all" (verse 29). The situation reflected in this pericope is the resistance of spirit possession to attempts to limit it to prescribed institutional settings. This is seen by some (Joshua) as a threat to the established order. It is defended by others (Moses—and the authors of the passage) as universally desirable. The issue is whether possession trance should be limited by social controls, subject, that is, to institutional sponsorship; or whether it should be autonomous. Apparently possession trance was now officially restricted to specific institutional settings, and actually enjoyed, or aspired to, by persons outside those settings. Both situations imply that possession trance no longer served the objective, instrumental purpose suggested for it earlier in this paper. Although there are no further references to possession trance in the literature (but see the discussion of prophecy below), there are other kinds of possession beliefs, well enough known, but worth briefly restating here within Bourguignon's general framework. " A belief in 'possession' may also be linked to the modification of a person's behavior, capacities, or state of health, in the absence of an altered state of consciousness". Such "alterations of capacity" may be referred to simply as possession, and may co-exist with possession trance (and visionary trance) in a society 24). Thus in Israel displays of extraordinary strength are spoken of in terms of a spirit of Yahweh overwhelming a person, as in the case of Samson, when he tore apart a lion with his bare hands (Judg. xiv 6), or threw off his bonds to kill a thousand men with the jawbone of an ass (Judg. xv 14-15). Or again the same terminology is employed when a person is consumed by unusual anger, as was Samson when the Philistines wheedled out of his bride the answer to his riddle (Judg. xiv 19), and Saul, when he heard of the Ammonites' threat to the inhabitants of Jabesh Gilead (1 Sam. xi 6)—the anger is explicitly mentioned in both cases. In 1 Sam. xviii 10 "A bad spirit of God overwhelmed Saul, wayyitnabbē>", and threw his spear at David. Here at least, it would appear, all are agreed that hitnabbP has nothing to do with prophecy. That it 24

) Bourguignon, pp. 15-17. Cf. the table on pp. 359 ff.

does not refer to the same kind of possession trance that we have been discussing is indicated by the consistent reference to a " b a d " spirit (xviii 10, xix 9, xvi 14, 15, 16, 23b—the adjective is omitted in 23a). It might seem that Saul's inordinate jealousy of David is interpreted as possession. But the passages preceding the references to the bad spirit and suggesting that motive were not originally part of the same continuous story. 1 Sam. xvi 14 simply states that the spirit of Yahweh left Saul, and a bad spirit from Yahweh plagued him, and this would originally have followed chapter xv in which Samuel rejected Saul. Thus we are left with an inordinate behavior sufficiently analogous to the better known possession trance to be described by the verb hitnabbP 25), but distinguished as possession by a bad spirit 26). Elsewhere a bad spirit is credited with upsetting good relations, as the one Yahweh sends between Abimelech and the lords of Shechem (Judg. ix 23). Ill In the preceding discussion of possession trance and other possession phenomena, it was not found necessary to refer to prophecy except when clarifying the ambiguous Hebrew terminology. None of the passages referred to involved any kind of mediumistic activity. But I shall also argue the converse, namely, that Yahwistic prophecy in Israel does not involve possession of any kind. In the remainder of the article several passages which have been thought to provide evidence of "ecstatic prophecy" in Israel will be briefly reconsidered. One body of evidence for prophetic possession trance has been seen in such passages as Is. xxi 3-4: At this my limbs writhe in anguish, I am gripped by pangs like a woman in labour. I am distraught past hearing, dazed past seeing, My mind reels, sudden convulsions seize me. (New English Bible) Apart from the fact that a first person account of a possession trance seems to be ruled out by Bourguignon's characterization (the subject does not remember his trance behavior), there is a more specific objection to this interpretation of such passages. D. R. Hillers has shown 2s ) The use of the verb in the present narrative emphasizes the reversal of Saul's rise to power. 26 ) Note further that the response at court to the first onset of the bad spirit was to have David brought in to appease—not foster—it with his music (1 Sam. xvi 16-23).

that they are examples of a much more widespread literary convention that uses such physical, as well as mental, symptoms as a means of portraying "the reaction to bad news"—see Is. xiii 7-8; Hab. iii 16; Jer. vi 22-3, xlix 23, 1 43; Ezek. xxi 11-12; and in a somewhat freer form: Ex. xv 14-16; Jer. iv 9, xxx 5-6. That this has nothing to do with prophecy as such is confirmed by the occurrence of the same literary convention in Ugaritic literature, where gods and kings react to bearers of bad news in a similar way 27). Three times a prophet is spoken of as mešuggāl "mad, wild, beside himself", an obvious reference to ecstatic states according to some scholars. Thus in Jer. xxix 24-7 a message sent by Shemaiah, an Israelite prophet in Babylon, to Zephaniah, priest in the Jerusalem temple, is quoted as holding Zephaniah responsible for locking up k0l-^îš mRšuggāÍ ûmitnabbP, and inquiring why he has not so dealt with Jeremiah. The letter was prompted by Jeremiah's message to the exiles, in which he told them to settle down in Babylon, and live a normal life, since their exile was going to last a long time (verse 28). The context is clearly concerned with prophetic conflict—compare Jeremiah's response in verses 31-2, and also in the larger context verses 8-9, 15-23. One prophet is trying to counter another by using abusive language—"any madman prophesying". Nothing in the context suggests abnormal behavior that could be indicative of actual "madness" or possession trance. In 2 Kings ix a prophet comes to the Israelite army at Ramoth Gilead, takes Jehu apart from his fellow-officers, and anoints him king. When Jehu reappears, the other officers ask him: "What did this meší1ggāl come to you f o r ? " (verse 11). As Jehu stands before them freshly anointed, he says : " Y o u know the man and his business". They protest they do not, and insist he tell them, which he then does. They immediately achnowledge him and proclaim him king (verse 13). Again there is nothing in the prophet's behavior reminiscent of madness or trance of any kind. It seems clear that the officers are sitting around bantering, and the prophet serves as a novel butt for their jokes. The awkward exchange between Jehu and them serves to sober them 28). Only then do they take the prophet seriously. 27 ) D. R. Hillers, " A Convention in Hebrew Literature: The Reaction to Bad News", Ζ AW 77 (1965), pp. 86-90. Cf. further the reaction of king Belshazzar to the writing on the wall: Dan. ν 6. 28 ) Jehu's "embarrassment" is noted by J. A. Montgomery and H. S. Gehman, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Books of Kings (Edinburgh, 1951), p. 401.

The interpretation of Hos. ix 7 is less transparent, but the phrases u>îl hannäbV mesuggäl 7 / hārûah "the prophet is stupid/inane/at a loss, the man of the spirit is mad/wild" seem to be a quotation of the people's response to Hosea 29). Since the same individual is referred to and the two adjectives seem to refer to opposite poles of human behavior, they cannot be simple descriptions. But even if the quotation is taken as a more general reference to different kinds of prophet, it remains essentially opprobrious 30). (NEB interprets the phrases as predictions of part of IsraePs punishment: "Then the prophet shall be made a fool . . .‫ 'י‬In that case, the distinction between actual prophetic behavior and that folly and madness to be suffered in the future is patent). In sum, the word mešuggāl is never used of prophets in contexts where it can be read as a neutral, descriptive term. Rather, it is used as a derogatory term in invective and levity, and as such cannot be cited in support of the view that prophets experienced possession trance or "ecstasy" 31). Guillaume headed his lecture on ecstasy with a quotation of 2 Kings iii ll-16a, remarking that the passage had been referred to "more than once" in that context (p. 290). It has remained a favorite proof-text for ecstatic prophecy. The kings of Israel and Judah approach Elisha in a military crisis, seeking an oracle from Yahweh. Elisha has them fetch a musician for him. When the musician begins to play, the " h a n d " of Yahweh comes upon Elisha, and he pronounces an oracle. The conjunction is unique 32), the text does not explicitly claim that Elisha's inspiration or Yahweh's word was a consequence of the music 33 ), and the terms used to describe Elisha's experience differ from those used in the passages where we have established clear reference to possession trance. Why then does Elisha call for music? Once again comparative evidence can be called upon to elucidate the situation. It has been observed in Haiti, where possession in a >e

29 ) H. W. Wolff, Hosea (Philadelphia, 1974), p. 155, E. Tr. of Dodekapropheton 1. Hosea (2nd edn, Neukirchen, 1965); J. W. Ward, Hosea: A Theological Commentary (New York, 1966) p. 157; J. L. Mays, Hosea (Philadelphia and London, 1969), p. 129. 30 ) Wolff: a "vehement insult" (Hosea, p. 152). Cf. Mays, Hosea, pp. 124, 130. 31 ) Note that the opponents of the prophet Muhammed maligned him by referring to him as " m a d " and possessed by spirits: W. M. Watt, Muhammad at Mecca (Oxford, 1953), p. 127. (On the word majnutt, cf. A. Guillaume, Prophecy and Divination, p. 205, where he compares mešuggāC.) 32 ) Y. Kaufmann, The Religion of Israel (Chicago, 1960; London, 1961), p. 96. 33 ) So recently H. Schweizer, Elischa in den Kriegen (Munich, 1974), pp. 147-8, and n. 90, where he cites numerous scholars who have assumed such a connection.

ritual context is expected to involve trance, that "degrees of dissociation vary from profound states of unconsciousness to dizziness to theatrical involvement to outright faking" 34). More generally, G. K. Park has written that "the drama of'possession' . . . may merely serve, like a mechanical device, to establish the apparent presence of otherwise invisible beings" 35). Given the recurring elements of irony and humor in the accounts of Elisha's dealings with the Omride kings, it would not be out of keeping for him to be portrayed as putting on a "performance" of certain features of possession trance for the benefit of the king with his assumed Phoenician leanings. Thus while it has to be admitted that the passage seems to attest to knowledge of the use of possession trance in prophecy, I would claim that it is specifically as a feature of Phoenician culture that it is introduced into this story (and perhaps indeed into the prophecy of the Omride court). Another passage which has been prominent in discussions of "ecstatic prophecy" in Israel is that which describes the behavior of the Baal prophets in the trial of gods on Mount Carmel in 1 Kings xviii. These "prophets" appeal to Baal all morning in vain, are goaded on by Elijah, and then cry louder, gash themselves till their blood flows, and "prophesy" (xviii 26-29). But there is no question of their prophesying in our sense of the term, for they are not speaking/or the god 36), but appealing to him. But does the word "prophesy" refer to their utterances at all? It seems more likely that it refers simply to their behavior 37), that is, to possession trance. However, the context makes it clear that they are not actually possessed by their god, for they can get no response of any kind from him. Rather, they are attempting to induce a response, and are doing so by going through the motions or forms of possession trance, which in this case are not the symptoms of a divine presence, but are intended as a kind of sympathetic magic, to induce the divine presence 38). Thus, while here too we have testimony to the knowledge of possession trance, no 34

) E. Bourguignon in M. E. Spiro, Context and Meaning in Cultural Anthropology (New York, 1965), p. 56. 35 ) G. K. Park, The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 93 (1963), p. 202. For the histrionic aspects of divination in general, Park's article as a whole is illuminating. Full reference: "Divination and its Social Contexts", JRAnthI 93 (1963), pp. 195-209, reprinted in W. A. Lessa and E. Z. Vogt (ed.), Reader in Comparative Religion (2nd edn, New York, 1965), pp. 382-92. 36 ) Any more than the "prophets" of the post-exilic text 1 Chr. xxv 3, who "thank and praise Yahweh". 37 ) So already Guillaume, p. 144. 38 ) J. Gray, I and II Kings (2nd edn, London, 1970), p. 399.

connection is made with prophecy 39). The behavior is histrionic, not oracular. At the same time, it must be noted that this text too is dealing with the Omride period, and reflects the authors' concern about the acceptance of Phoenician institutions—especially religious institutions—in Israel. Thus, although it is not explicitly stated here, it may well be that mediumistic possession trance was known in Israel during this period. It would have entered Israel, along with other elements of Phoenician culture, through the pro-Phoenician court, and lasted roughly as long as the Omrides. IV In the first part of this article I argued for a systematic separation of the categories "possession trance" and "prophecy" in discussions of Israelite institutions. The second part of the article attempted to elucidate the possible functions and settings of possession trance, as well as briefly reconsidering other forms of possession referred to in the Old Testament. In the third part was a review of those expressions and passages most frequently cited as evidence of "ecstatic prophecy" in ancient Israel. I conclude that possession trance is not an element of Israelite prophecy, and figures in a history of Israelite prophecy only marginally in discussions of i) the possible impact of Phoenician prophecy on Israelite institutions, especially in the Omride court, and ii) the calumny and mockery to which prophets could be subjected. 39

) So Jepscn, Nabi, p. 7—but. cf. p. 145.

P O E T I C

S T R U C T U R E R H E T O R I C

A N D I N

P R O P H E T I C

H O S E A

by JACK R. L U N D B O M Berkeley

In his Prolegomenon to George Buchanan Gray's newly reissued The Forms of Hebrew Poetrj (New York, 1972), Professor David Noel Freedman proposes that a unit of poetry in Hos. viii 9-13 be isolated on the basis of an inclusio (pp. xxxvi-xxxvii). According to Freedman, the single colon in v. 9 : For behold they have gone up to Assyria 1)

kî-hēmmâ ^ālû ‫ר‬as sûr

balances the single colon in v. 13: Behold they will return to Egypt

hēmmâ misrayim yāšûbû

Together the two constitute a normal bicolon which the poet has broken up in order to give this unit of poetry a frame. When the two cola are juxtaposed key terms balance each other nicely: hēmmâ is repeated, the perfect lālû and imperfect yāsûbû correspond to each other, while "Assyria" and " E g y p t " constitute what may very well be a fixed pair 2 ). Hosea elsewhere uses "Assyria" and " E g y p t " in parallel constructions (vii 11, ix 3, xi 5, 11, xii 2). We note too that 1 ālû ‫י‬aššûr and misrayim yāšûbû form a chiasmus. Freedman says "the two cola complement each other impressively", and so they do. The recognition that these cola could fit together in parallelism is not new. Duhm, for example, transposed the single colon of 13 .‫ע‬ so that it immediately followed the single colon of v. 9 3). Freedman's suggestion has the advantage, however, in that it explains the text as it stands. And, if correct, it provides us with important new insights into Hebrew poetry and Hebrew rhetoric. 1

) Freedman translates c