The Hebrew-Wisdom Dictionary

18. "Davar" (Part 4, final) - Never EVER a "thing".

Different reflexes, or variations, of the Hebrew root-word davar appear thousands of times in the Bible. Regarding over 90% of these occurrences there is never doubt that the word in question is directly related to "speech". In the previous posts I demonstrated how simple it is to see that most of the would-be anomalies are also related to speech, and are mistranslated as "thing", or "matter" etc. Simply replace "thing" with "tale" (or "telling"), in most cases, and you reach a very close reading of the Hebrew original.

In Deuteronomy 4:32, for instance, Moses urges the Israelites to remember the extraordinary story of the Exodus. Not the "thing" that happened to them since they left Egypt, but rather the "tale" of their unprecedented experiences:

"For ask now ... whether such a great tale as this has ever happened or was ever heard."

A test case for such a revised reading would concern a previous verse in the same chapter, where Moses refers to the "dvarim" (plural) that the Israelites "saw" with their own eyes (4:9). Verses like this one caused the mistaken understanding of davar in the first place, for how can one "see" a "telling"or a "tale"? Well, in an oral-lore culture that is exactly what you see: "the tales that you witnessed with your own eyes". This is why the end of the verse demands that these very tales, be transmitted--using speech of course--"to thy sons, and thy sons' sons"; oral lore par excellence. As the image below demonstrates, while, arguably, today we capture events primarily through pictures, in ancient times these pictures were made strictly of words.

Such an understanding leaves us with the final fraction of a percent of the uses of "davar" -- a scarce few verses out of thousands -- that are, admittedly, awkward to explain:

Exodus 9:4: "And the LORD shall sever between the cattle of Israel and the cattle of Egypt: and there shall no-davar die of all that is the children's of Israel."

Leviticus 5:2: "If a person touches any unclean davar, whether it is the carcass of an unclean beast, or the carcass of unclean livestock... he also shall be unclean and guilty."

Numbers 31:23: "Every davar that may abide the fire, you shall make it go through the fire, and it shall be clean."

Deuteronomy 23:20: "You shall not charge interest to your brother--interest on money or food or any-davar that is lent out at interest."

To achieve unanimity one would have to say that (a) the first verse refers to a "death-sentence", or lack thereof; (b) the second verse refers to an article "pronounced" unclean by a priest; (c) the third verse refers to something "pronounced safe" for fire; (d) the final verse refers to verbal agreements of terms.

Allow for these, and you resurrect dramatic new meaning regarding hundreds of other verses where the "speech factor" involved has been smudged out by translating "davar" as "thing." I believe that in biblical Hebrew (unlike in later times) the term never had such a speechless meaning. Ever.

Ethan.

 

 

 

17. "Davar" (Part 3) - A telling tale

So here are another 10 verses where the KJV translates the Hebrew word "davar" as "thing", and thus misses a very telling (logos-like) aspect regarding each verse. These early mistakes, as I see them, carried to most current English translations of the Hebrew Bible.

My suggestions, regarding the correct reading of "davar" in each verse, attempt to bring back the direct association to speech that is inherent to the term's root (דבר). Note how even small nuances provide a different flavor to the verse, if not an outright new meaning:

Genesis 18:14 - "Is any thing (should be "any declaration") too hard for the LORD?"

Genesis 24:66 - "And the servant told Isaac all the things (should be "all the tales") that he had done"

Deuteronomy 19:15 - "At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses,shall the matter (should be "the pronouncement",i.e. verdict statement) be established"

2-Samuel 11:18-19 - "Then Joab sent and told David all the things (should be "tales") concerning the war. And charged the messenger, saying, When thou hast made an end of telling the matters (should be "tales") of the war unto the king..."

Proverbs 18:13 - "He that answereth a matter (should be "a statement") before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him..."; this verse is about the etiqute of discourse

Genesis 41:37, after Josef delivered his interpretation of Pharaoh's dreams - "And the thing (should be "the telling") was good in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of all his servants." A "telling" of a dream, as in an oracle, is its interpertation.

1-Kings 17:17, and numerous similar verses - "And it came to pass after these things (should be: "after these tales")..."

2-Chronicles 19:3 - "Nevertheless there are good things (should be "good accounts") found in thee, in that you have removed the [idolatrous] groves out of the land..."

Job 4:12 - "Now a thing (should be "a speaking") was secretly brought to me, and mine ear received a little thereof"

Ecclesiastes 8:5 - "Whoso keepeth the commandment shall feel no evil thing..." should read: "Who that keeps the commandment shall know (!) no mistaken teaching", for correct action breeds correct knowledge and understanding.

And a bonus verse:

Ecclesiastes  12:13 - "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter"; should read simply: "The telling concludes, all has been heard..." (סוף דבר-הכל נשמע)

Ethan

John Tenniel's illustration, for a scene in Alice in Wonderland, suggests how in oral-lore cultures the "telling" -- the "davar" -- of an event, or of an idea, can create and define its very reality. 

In a way, Carroll's wordplay toys with the (long waggling) "thingness" of the mouse's telling:

'Mine is a long and a sad tale!' said the Mouse, turning to Alice, and sighing. 'It is a long tail, certainly,' said Alice, looking down with wonder at the Mouse's tail; 'but why do you call it sad?'

 

16. "Davar" (Part 2) - a MESSAGE about correct translation...

Let us follow the exchange between David and Jonathan in 1-Samuel Chapter 20.

David, a retainer, is afraid of the ruling king Saul. He finds an ally in the king's son, Jonathan. The young prince accepts a task: To ascertain Saul's intentions towards David. But he needs to transfer this information without open betrayal. Jonathan comes up with a plan, and tells David to return in three days, hide and watch:

And I will shoot three arrows... And behold, I will send the lad, saying, "Go, find the arrows." If I say to the lad, "Look, the arrows are on this side of you, take them," then you are to come, for--as the Lord lives--it is safe for you, and there is no danger. But if I say to the youth, "Look, the arrows are beyond you," then leave; for the Lord has sent you away."

That plan was soon put into action:

In the morning Jonathan went out into the field to the appointment with David, and with him a little lad. And he said to his lad, "Run and find the arrows which I shoot." As the lad ran... Jonathan called after the lad and said, "Is not the arrow beyond you?" And Jonathan called after the lad, "Hurry, make haste, stay not." So Jonathan's lad gathered up the arrows, and came to his master. But the lad knew not a thing (davar); only Jonathan and David knew the thing (davar).

The reason I bring the story concerns, of course, the two underlined appearances of the term "davar". Since the entire episode is about how Jonathan tells David of Saul's anger, I find the mistranslations of the term -- as "thing" -- to be particularly disturbing. How can anyone neglect the logos-nature of this covert operation? It is clearly a communication; not a "thing" and not a "matter". In truth, what the final verse says is literally:

And the lad knew no message; only Jonathan and David knew the message.

***

The funny thing about "thing" is that the word can replace almost anything (object-thing, that is) and still make sense. We could talk of the "Ten Things" that God gave Moses on Mount Sinai, because a decree is also a "thing". Likewise, it's possible to translate Genesis 11:1: "And the whole earth was of one language, and of one thing" (rather than one speech). Indeed we can even call the Hebrew name for Deuteronomy as the Book of Things (dvarim), without it being a lie. The problem with these options is the loss of data. We are missing the SPEECH nature of Gods words on Sinai, or of Moses' book-long oration, or the nature of the universal uniformity in the time of the Tower of Babel, or of Jonathan's arrow-game. Thus "thing/s" strips the verses of a significant layer of meaning, even when it is technically correct.

Ethan

P.S.-- Rembrandt's portrayal of David and Jonathan captures the one-sided nature of Jonathan's deep love, which David could never really return, as David later laments: "thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." Jonathan's love towards David in mentioned many times, but, though David was moved by Jonathan's adoration, and obviously cared for the prince, the text is very careful never to refer to this "love" the other way around. As Rembrandt so brilliantly shows: Jonathan is in love. David is not.

15. "Davar" (Part 1) - Always from "speech"; identical to "logos".

There are two good reasons to start the discussion about the critical Hebrew term "davar" immediately after the holiday of Shavuot.

The first is obvious. According to rabbinic tradition, this holiday commemorates the day when God gave the Ten Commandments. These commandments, in Hebrew, are called the ten "dvarim" (using the plural form for davar, as it appears in Deuteronomy 4:12 and Exodus 34:28). So each so-called "commandment" is really a single "davar".

The second reason continues last week's post about the Book of Ruth, due to a very interesting passage. Naomi, having received Ruth's report about her night-time encounter with her husband-to-be, says:

"Sit still, my daughter, until you know how the davar will fall: for the man will not be in rest, until he have concluded the davar this day." (Ruth 3:18)

What is the connection between the two? How does the judiciary settlement that Boaz has to reach with the competing kinsman (regarding the future of Ruth and of Naomi's inheritance) have to do with the ten "commandments"?

The answer is that the Hebrew term (דבר), which relates directly to the verb "to talk" -- or to PROCLAIM (לדבר) --  is equivalent to the Greek notion of 'logos', with its precise yet varied meanings: a formalized thought, account, report, word, speech, argument, story, etc.

In the two cases above, both in the ten commandments and in the judiciary case of Boaz, the biblical text is referring to a decree: to a conclusive "statement."  It's about THE WORD coming out.

When God proclaims, in the so-called first commandment: "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt,"  he is not commanding any action, but rather making an authoritative pronouncement.  Likewise, Naomi tells Ruth about the impending court of elders:

"Sit still, my daughter, until you know which way the pronouncement will fall: for the man will not be in rest, until he have concluded the pronouncement this day."

You may choose to replace "pronouncement" with "account" or anothe synonym. But the point remains that at the end of the day the talked-of issue reaches a conclusion, and that it has a wrapped-up "telling"of it. For a primarily oral-lore culture, a true davar is the formulated testament that can then be passed on.

In the next posts we will see how davar should ALWAYS be read as something to do with SPEECH (using varying nuances of "statement", "decree", "message", "tale/story" etc.), and NEVER as a "thing" (a sadly common misconception), and why the Greek Septuagint is perfectly correct in translating davar as logos. Many verses will, in this manner, gain bright new clarity.

Ethan

"Sit still, my daughter, until you know which way the logos will fall: for the man will not be in rest, until he have concluded the logos this day."

14. "Am" - The Collective.

The Book of Ruth is read on Shavuot (Feast of Weeks/ Pentecost), commemorating a lone woman who accepted upon herself to join the Jewish people and to follow God's words to them. She did so with her famous saying to Naomi: "thy people--my people"

The young Ruth then joined her mother in law, going from her native land of Moab to Judea, "and they came to Bethlehem in the beginning of barley harvest". In Bethlehem--"House of Bread"--the entire story is told midst the setting of this barley harvest. 

This setting is telling. For the harvest is an act of reaping individual ears of grain from their autonomous beds, and collecting them into sheaves. The act symbolizes, therefore, Ruth's own transformation: As she "reaped" herself from her individual growing ground of Moab, to join the collective of the People of Israel.

And indeed, the Hebrew word for "people", or עם ('am), is not only related to the preposition "with" (or the adjective "together"), it is directly associated with the Hebrew for "sheaf - עמר (`omer), teaching us that in Ancient Israelite thought the concept of a "people" equals the notion of a collective entity. Indeed, Naomi's name too (נ-עמ-י) plays on the collective 'am theme.

Happy holiday, and sorry for the long absence

Ethan

13. "Tapuach" - An apple with a soul... (for Rosh Hashanah)

What is this schmaltzy Rosh Hashanah post doing in our Wisdom blog?? Honest, I have an excuse. Three in fact. Firstly, we were just talking about trees and their connection to the biblical idea of growing bones. Well, tapuach is a tree. In fact, it is used as the name of the apple tree and not only of its bulbous fruit. When the bride tells her lover “Beneath the tapuach I awakened you” (Songs 8:5), it was not out of fear of a Sir-Newton-like experience, but rather to enjoy the tree’s fragrant shade. Secondly, teachings of wisdom are likened to it: “A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver” (Proverbs 25:11). That is our goal..

Lastly, this blog will lead to the biblical SOUL, and the root word of tapuach is identical to the verb used to describe how God installed it in Adam! It is also close to the Hebrew word for flowers, perach. Why? Here we need another verse: “The day is kindled, and the shadows flee away” (Songs 2:17). The kindling verb, yapuach, holds the secret. In biblical thought, flowers are like plants set ablaze, bursting in colorful flames. The soul too, being an entity of Light, is something that God kindled inside of Adam (Alas, the Creator did not “breathe” any such thing into Adam’s “nostrils”…). Apples too share this imagery because of their bulbous nature. It’s as if someone warmed the young buds in rays of blessed light and schwoop, they swelled-up in hot, luscious, yellow and red!

Now, the only thing missing is the honey. Blessed be your year!

Ethan

P.S. For a full exposition on Genesis 2:7 see my essay “A Soul of Fire”. Next post after Yom Kippur.

12. "Etzem" (Part One) - Our tree-like, growing "boneframe"

It is so painful to look at. So hard core. But in all of my research I have never found a better way to illustrate the biblical connection between etzem, man's skeletal boneframe, and etz, tree. I share with you the tragic 1978 war photograph from Nicaragua, by Susan Meiselas, not in order to shock, but because it is the single image that burned into my mind the uncompromising reality of how Ancient Israelite Philosophy viewed the world. We sprout. We nourish. We grow. We seed. We wilt. We fertilize. It is the nature of our base, material being. Man as tree. Our vegetative self.

Ethan

11. “Erva”- Sex: it's all about fluids.

A common biblical phrase about sex, is normally translated as “to uncover the nakedness.” This Hebrew idiom expresses, however, more than a removal of modest attire. It means, rather, to "dis-cover the sex,” as in the famous biblical sense of “knowing.” The second word, erva, is simply “sex”— a noun for genitalia, not "nakedness." It is the translators that were overly puritan, I believe, and not the Hebrew writers.

The most important verses, regarding erva, are Leviticus 20:17-19, for they show the multiple meaning of "discovering" another person’s sex:

“If there is a man who takes his sister… so that he sees her sex and she sees his sex, it is a disgrace... He has discovered his sister’s sex; he bears his guilt. If there is a man who lies with a menstruous woman and discovers her sex, he has tapped her source, and she has discovered the source of her blood; thus both of them shall be cut off from among their people. You shall also not discover the sex of your mother’s sister or of your father’s sister, for such a one has tapped his relation; they will bear their guilt.”

The meaning of "discovering" is retained in English. It means (a) to see, albeit on a mutual basis, but also (b) to lie with, and (c) to tap [into]. The "taping" or element of discovery is most interesting. Immodest uncovering of nakedness is the same, obviously, whether a woman is menstruous or not; but, for whatever reason, the discovery is different in nature when the act draws upon the woman’s "blood source." The translation of the verb (he'era) is based, amongst others, on a verse about Rachel: "And she hastened, and tapped (va'taar) her pitcher into the trough" (Genesis 24:20). If the noun erva relates directly to this similar-sounding verb for "taping/drawing liquid" I cannot say for sure, though the case of the aunt makes it clear that the taping faculty of erva is not restricted to menstruation. Interestingly, another very close term, erya, IS menstruous: "When you were naked and erya—squirming in your blood you were" (Ezekiel 16:22); "In the shame of erya, she who dwells in Zaanan does not come forth" (Micah 1:11). In any case, erva seems to have more to do with drawing bodily fluids than with nakedness, and the above passage demonstrated how well "sex" works as a proper translation.

From here on it is simple: “Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the sex of his father” (Genesis 9:22); “you shall not go up by steps to My altar, so that your sex will not be discovered on it” (Exodus 20:22); “When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he found a sexual account in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement” (Deuteronomy 24:1); “young and old, naked and barefoot with exposed backsides —aye! the sex of Egypt” (Isaiah 20:4); “Your sex was discovered in your whoredoms with your lovers” (Ezekiel 16:36). A more difficult verse concerns keeping an army camp holy: "The LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp... and He must not see in you a sexual account, or He will turn away from you” (Deuteronomy 23:9-15). The passage starts with reference to nocturnal emissions, and continues with the obligation to have an outhouse. At first glance, the context seems to connect the "account of erva" with uncovered feces. It may, however, have more to do with exposed backsides, and it very likely hints at what not to do at night, in an army-camp tent. This, then, is how I think one should read the chunk of prohibitions in Leviticus 18:6-19:

“None of you shall approach any body-relation of his to discover sex; I am the LORD. You shall not discover the sex of your father, that is, the sex of your mother... You shall not discover the sex of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s sex. You shall not discover the sex of a woman and of her daughter, nor shall you take her son’s daughter or her daughter’s daughter, to discover her sex; they are relatives. It is lewdness. You shall not marry a woman in addition to her sister as a rival while she is alive, to discover her sex. Also you shall not approach a woman to discover her sex during her menstrual impurity.”

In a single biblical story, however, erva is used as a metaphor — when Joseph challenges his hungry brothers who came down to Egypt from Canaan:

“Joseph remembered the dreams which he had about them, and said to them, ‘You are spies; you have come to look at the erva of our land.” Then they said to him, ‘No, my lord… your servants are not spies.’ Yet he said to them, ‘No, but you have come to look at the erva of our land!’” (Genesis 42:9-12).

This is the only non-sexual use of erva in the bible, denoting secrets. I wonder, however, if Joseph cannot be referring specifically to the source of the Nile — so similar to the idea of a woman's source of menstrual flow! Furthermore, in a primitive fertility-rites culture is it quite conceivable to talk of "the sex of the land." In any case, one cannot question the fact that the dark secrets of the Nile's fertile flow would be the most important strategic assets in an empire that is built, and completely dependent, upon it.

Ethan

/

/

/

/

/

/

//

P.S. A future post will explain why, in the Hebrew Bible, the term davar always means a "statement," or an "account." Those familiar with my essay on the soul will appreciate that, in the Hebrew Bible, sex relates exclusively to man's water-element, itself connected to the cosmic blood-reservoir.The verb "to tap" is a perfect translation of הערה. It is generally associated with the water sources of the cosmos, such as the Nile, or the water underworld to which the life-blood (nefesh) drains to at death. Relevant dictionary definitions of the verb "to tap" include: 1). to draw liquid from a vessel. 2).to draw off liquid by removing a tap or by piercing a container. 3). to penetrate, for the purpose of drawing something off. As to גלה, I thank my sister in law, Schulamith, for replacing "un-cover" with the brilliant "dis-cover." Regarding the sexual element of the Nile my friend Benzi drew my attention to the fact that the Nile, like all biblical water sources, is said to have lips.

10. “Basar” (Part Four, final) – “From my BODY, I shall vision God”

We reach the crux of understanding basar as the Hebrew word for the “body.” The following bullets augment what we already established. You will not believe that these verses are commonly translated with the word “flesh” (the New American Standard Bible is a notable exception):/

1.       Basar is an inclusive term for the “body,” which relates to man’s entire soft-tissue husk (including the eyes, internal organs, etc). This was demonstrated in the first post. Thus, instead of “flesh,” one washes the BODY —"He shall bathe his body with water” (Leviticus 16:24)—just like one clothes it: “Linen breeches shall he wear over his body” (Leviticus 6:3); “He… wore sackcloth over his body (1-Kings 21:27). More examples:

• “And the ill-looking and lean-bodied cows did eat up the seven well-looking and stout cows” (Genesis 41:2-4. Many verses talk of fat bodies, rather than fat "flesh")
• “And he went up, and lay upon the child, and put his mouth upon his mouth, and his eyes upon his eyes, and his hands upon his hands: and stretched himself upon the child; and the body of the child waxed warm” (2-Kings 4:34)
• “Is my strength the strength of stones, Or is my body of iron?” (Job 6:12, bronze was the iron of the day...).

2.       Fittingly, basar is used as one side of a Mind & Body Dichotomy, as well as Soul & Body Dichotomies: “You brought in foreigners, uncircumcised in mind and uncircumcised in body” (Ezekiel 44:7); “Therefore my mind is glad, and my glory rejoices, my body also dwells in safety” (Psalms 16:9); “My nefesh thirsts for You, my body yearns for You” (Psalms 63:2, cf. Isaiah 10:18); “Their horses are body and not spirit” (Isaiah 31:3).

/

3.       Things like hair, skin, bodily secretions, and even bloodstream and breath, are talked of as being “of” the basar—they belong to the BODY: Therefore it is the BODY, not the "flesh," that is shaved—"Let them use a razor over their whole body and wash their clothes” (Numbers 8:7)—or mutilated: “You shall not make any scrape-for-the-dead in your body, nor inscribe any tattoo upon you” (Leviticus 19:28); “My covenant (brit) be in your body” (Genesis 17:14).

/

4.       Bodily ORGANS are all basar. As we saw, in case of angels that includes wings, which are part of the angel’s fleshless body. Another example: Just like in Ezekiel 23:20, about endowed donkeys, note how the following verse names the penis as the bodily-organ that must be circumcised, and not the skin that needs removal: “And you shall circumcise the body of your foreskin” (Genesis 17:11). Similarly, “Make for them linen breeches to cover the body of the sex; they shall reach from the loins even to the thighs” (Exodus 28:42).

/

5.       Basar is one part of a consistent biblical conceptualization of the physique, with two primary elements: A skeletal bone-frame (etzem), clothed with the entity of a soft-tissue husk (basar). A whole post was dedicated to this point.

/

6.       Everything organic and/or genetic about us relates strictly to basar. It is the living BODY that makes one an organism. This is why two parents become one body. “Basar eyes,” for instance, means “organic eyes” (as opposed to inorganic “stone” ones). Defining the organism, basar can also stand for the entity of a human being: “For who is any-body who has heard the voice of the living God…” (Deuteronomy 5:22).

Case Study: When God says: “I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy every-basar with a breath of life” (Genesis 6:17) the verse means “every breathing organism.” Other organisms didn't mind the water... In this story, basar truly delineates a type of body (or organism): “And of every animal, of every basar, two of all shall you bring into the ark, to keep them alive” (6:19). Translations insert “every sort”—but “sort” is not in the text. Indeed, “every basar” is a way of saying every existing body-form, or in other words—every species; the Green-Wing-Macaw have one body that defines them, giraffes have another. Since genders are versions of each such body (the Mr. and Mrs. versions of the giraffe bodytype) , the verse qualifies “they shall be male and female.” Or to summarize: “Those that entered, male and female of every species, entered as God commanded” (7:16).

7.       Indeed, Some 30 times in the Hebrew Bible, the compound term kol-basr is used to mean “every-body,” or, simply, everybody: “The glory of the LORD will be revealed, and everybody will see it together” (Isaiah 40:5).

/

8.       Biological relatives are called basar-relatives, because it is the BODY that germinates progeny: “None of you shall approach any body-relative of his, to discover the sex” (Leviticus 18:6. How dare the NASB translate basar, here, as “blood”…); “Divide your bread with the hungry And bring the homeless poor into the house… And do not evade one of your own body” (Isaiah 58:7); “Bring out with you every living thing of every-species (basar) that is with you, birds and animals… that they may breed abundantly” (Genesis 8:17).

/

9.       When basar is food, the antiquated idea is eating body-parts, like for us “eating ribs.” Thus: "Be sure not to eat the blood, for the blood is the life-force, and you shall not eat the life-force with the body” (Deuteronomy 12:23).

/

10.  Like us, the ancients also craved youthful bodies: “His body returned like the body of a small youth” (2-Kings 5:14); “His body of youth shall be restored; he shall return to the days of his bloom;” (Job 33:25): “He put his hand into his bosom again… and it returned like his body” (Exodus 4:7; in all of these cases the body was first inflicted with blemishing disease).

/

Why do I care so much? Why is it worth rewriting so many translations? Because reading basar as “flesh” turns organs into stuff, and the biological organism into meat. It thus degrades the deep insight of biblical wisdom regarding the nature of man, at the same time that it skews the meaning of numerous verses. In addition, "flesh" has a derogatory feel which "body" does not. For the Hebrew Bible, the physical self is as much a tool for blessing as it is of sin. Like the title from Job 19:26 implies—even our highest appreciation of the divine is made possible by the bodily apparatus of our cognition; prophecy itself uses the grey cells of our physical brain.

May you rejoice in your body,

Ethan

9. “Basar” (Part Three) – Yum, this body tastes amazing!

Scholars love to claim that the Hebrew Bible had no clear notion of “the body.” This claim, however, fails to see how in English too the word “body” might pickup different meanings. Sometimes “body” means the entire physique, but other times we use the word to exclude the head and limbs. Likewise we can find a “body” in the street and still tell the police that there was “nobody” there at the time… Nonetheless, despite a body of evidence, we are quite sure that WE have a perfectly clear notion about what a body is. There is no reason in the world to allow for less in the Ancient Israelite mind. Moreover, these same researchers have failed to identify the fundamental biblical concept of the physique as a combination of the skeletal bone-frame and the soft tissue body, etzem and basar. This notion—which we learned in the previous post—is perfectly consistent across the entire canon.

The trickiest cases, for my reading of basar, concern verses where it is food. We have no notion of eating the “bodies” of animals, only their “meat” (or “flesh”). The many verses about basar as foodstuff have, therefore, skewed our reading of the term and prevented us from reading it as “body,” across the board. In truth, however, our modern notion about hamburgers not being bodystuff is arbitrary. Read, for instance, STEP FOUR from a New York Times article (July 1986) about how to cook squid:

“Rinse the body and tentacles well. You can now cook the body and tentacles as they are or, if preferred, slice the body into rings for deep-frying or sautéing.”

Well, if you can cook the body of a squid then you can cook the body of a cow... It is only convention that makes the idea seem weird. In fact, even in some verses that concern basar as foodstuff, translating the word as “body,” rather that the accepted “flesh,” makes perfect sense. Just remember how the ancients cooked and ate their meat, without the benefit of processed packaging. The following verse should easily illustrate the point:

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

Allow me to reiterate. In many verses using “meat” for basar would be more than acceptable (try it, for instance, in the pig verse above). Rarely, it’s even unavoidable. What I care about are the non foodstuff verses—which we will return to, with vigor, next week. In order to redeem them, however, from the clutches of “flesh” we must see how, for the ancients, “meat” was a superfluous notion: eating flesh was no different than eating bodies, or body parts, or bodystuff… they would hardly understand the modern distinction. Indeed, ask yourself the following: Are we ourselves perfectly at ease calling a serving of broiled cow-brain, or goose liver, or bone marrow, or tong, or ox testicles, or frog legs, “flesh”? With these, doesn’t it feel much more like eating body-parts? Even regarding muscle-tissue, we speak of “eating ribs” (a body part) and not rib-meat. Well, in antiquity “shoulder roast” felt quite the same.

It helps to understand also that the biblical word for eating is of a mauling plus devouring nature: A sword can “eat” a body, as does leprosy—just like fire “eats” wood. It is in the same sense that eating devours the body of an animal. The following basar verse refers to the Israelites devouring quail, but the picture is the same:

 

/

/

//

/

/

/

/

//

/

So here are a few more verses, within the context of feeding, which, in addition to “flesh,” can also be read quite beautifully with “body” standing for basar:

·         “Within three more days Pharaoh… will hang you on a tree, and the birds will eat your body off you” (Genesis 40:19)

·         “[the Passover lamb] is to be eaten in a single house; you are not to take any of the body outside of the house, nor are you to break any bone in it” (Exodus 12:46)

·         “you shall not eat any prey body in the field; you shall throw it to the dogs” (Exodus 22:30)

·         “And their body shall be yours, as the wave-breast and as the right thigh…” (Numbers 18:18)

·         “And on the tables was the body of the offering” (Ezekiel 40:43)

So next time you pickup hamburgers from the supermarket—think dead bodystuff... J If nothing else, you might feel an esthetic dissonance in slapping on it a slice of cheese, made from a mother’s fountain of life.

Bon-appétit,

Ethan