נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

For discussions which focus upon specific words, their origin, meaning, relationship to other ANE languages.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Isaac Fried
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Isaac Fried » Tue Apr 02, 2019 9:08 pm

We read there
נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה לֹא יֹאכַל לְטָמְאָה בָהּ
NIV: "He must not eat anything found dead or torn by wild animals, and so become unclean through it"
Indeed, נְבֵלָה is a נְפֵלָה, an animal that fell down of illness or weakness, whereas טְרֵפָה is an animal torn apart by another animal of prey.
Related to טרף is שרף, 'destroyed and consumed by fire'.

In Isaiah 1:30 we again encounter NBL
כְּאֵלָה נֹבֶלֶת עָלֶהָ
NIV: "like an oak with fading leaves"
where נֹבֶלֶת is clearly נֹפֶלֶת, 'shedding'.
In Isaiah 24:4
אָבְלָה נָבְלָה הָאָרֶץ אֻמְלְלָה נָבְלָה תֵּבֵל
NIV: "The earth dries up and withers, the world languishes and withers"
נָבְלָה is, indeed, more in the sense of 'wither, shrivel'

Isaac Fried, Boston University

James Stinehart

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby James Stinehart » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:08 pm

Isaac Fried:

Is the NBLH / נבלה that you cite related to BLH / בלה at Genesis 18: 12? They seem to have a somewhat similar meaning: “withered” vs. “waxed old”.

Here is Genesis 18: 2 (KJV):

“Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old [BLH / BLTY / בלה / בלתי] shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?”

Sarah, despite having “waxed old”, would soon manage to bear Isaac when she was stated 90 archaic shaneh of age, being age 45 in 12-month years / non-archaic shaneh. In the ancient world, age 45 was virtually the oldest age a woman could be and still bear, semi-miraculously but not a biological impossibility, a healthy son as her first child.

Jim Stinehart

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Isaac Fried » Sat Apr 06, 2019 9:33 pm

Yes! נבל and בלה seem indeed to be but variants. Consider Deut. 8:4
שִׂמְלָתְךָ לֹא בָלְתָה מֵעָלֶיךָ וְרַגְלְךָ לֹא בָצֵקָה זֶה אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה
NIV: "Your clothes did not wear out and your feet did not swell during these forty years"
Here are some more equivalents with an initial nun
נבל - בלה, נבע - בעה, נדח - דחה, נדם - דמה, נהם - המה, נזר - זרה
נסק - שגא, נפל - פלה, נפק - פקע, נצב - צבה, נצל - צלה, נקר - קרע
נשא - שאה, נשל - שלה, נבט - בטא


Gen. 18:12
וַתִּצְחַק שָׂרָה בְּקִרְבָּהּ לֵאמֹר אַחֲרֵי בְלֹתִי הָיְתָה לִּי עֶדְנָה וַאדֹנִי זָקֵן
NIV: So Sarah laughed to herself as she thought, “After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I now have this pleasure?”
uses the variant בלה BLH because נבל NBL has other unsavory connotations. See Gen. 34:7
כִּי נְבָלָה עָשָׂה בְיִשְׂרָאֵל לִשְׁכַּב אֶת בַּת יַעֲקֹב
NIV: "because Shechem had done an outrageous thing in[a] Israel by sleeping with Jacob’s daughter"

BTW I think that עֶדְנָה EDNAH is 'vigor', like אֶדְנָה, and that נְבָלָה is 'a despicable act'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Isaac Fried » Sat Apr 06, 2019 10:16 pm

As I see it, the Hebrew verb does not represent a process (it is not a video movie), but is rather a still picture of the end result of the made state. Thus, נבל NBL and נפל NPL, 'fall', are not for the descent, but rather for the end result of the collapsed heap (or pile) rising (rising!) on the ground. Thus, both נבל NBL and נפל NPL may refer to something lofty or elevated, על. Indeed, in 1Sam. 10:3 we encounter from this root a נֵבֶל-יָיִן, 'bottle of wine, skin of wine', while in Ps. 81:2(3) we encounter a נֶבֶל, 'harp'.
The נָפִיל NAPIYL of Nu. 13:32-33
וְכָל הָעָם אֲשֶׁר רָאִינוּ בְתוֹכָהּ אַנְשֵׁי מִדּוֹת וְשָׁם רָאִינוּ אֶת הַנְּפִילִים בְּנֵי עֲנָק מִן הַנְּפִלִים וַנְּהִי בְעֵינֵינוּ כַּחֲגָבִים וְכֵן הָיִינוּ בְּעֵינֵיהֶם
is apparently 'giant'.

In spoken Hebrew נְפוֹלֶת, like נְשוֹרֶת, is 'fallout'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

James Stinehart

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby James Stinehart » Sun Apr 07, 2019 10:05 am

Isaac Fried:

At first glance, it is hard to connect the following two usages of NBLH / נבלה that you cite:

(1) “A despicable act”, being what young Shechem does to Dinah at Genesis 34: 7: NBLH / נבלה.

(2) “Withers”, referring to the earth drying up and decaying at Isaiah 24: 4, featuring the same four Hebrew letters: NBLH / נבלה.

Is the notion that for young Shechem, all concept of what was right and proper had “withered”, which is what then led young Shechem to commit “a despicable act”? Is that how one gets from “withers” to “a despicable act”? Young Shechem is certainly n-o-t “withered” in a conventional sense, since he is young and vibrant, not withered and old.

By the way, the KJV translation of NBLH / נבלה at Genesis 34: 7 as “folly” seems particularly poor; it must reflect a difference in meaning between Elizabethan English and modern English.

In Biblical Hebrew, if I am catching the drift here (and this is the specific question I am asking), the emphasis seems to be on young Shechem’s moral compass having “withered”, which is what set the stage for his “despicable act”.

Jim Stinehart

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Isaac Fried » Sun Apr 07, 2019 10:12 am

Jim,
As you are apparently greatly interested in the story of the patriarchs, you may want to listen to my very very unpleasant hunch that the covert theme of Gen. 18-19 is the rape of Sarah by some grandees of Sdom, and the subsequent annihilation (following a struggle with the moral dilemma of the merciless killing of all) of this place by Abraham and his allies.


Isaac Fried, Boston University

James Stinehart

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby James Stinehart » Sun Apr 07, 2019 12:47 pm

Isaac Fried:

You wrote: “As you are apparently greatly interested in the story of the patriarchs, you may want to listen to my very very unpleasant hunch that the covert theme of Gen. 18-19 is the rape of Sarah by some grandees of Sdom, and the subsequent annihilation (following a struggle with the moral dilemma of the merciless killing of all) of this place by Abraham and his allies.”

Not.

1. Sarah Had “Waxed Old”, So Would Not Be Raped

Per Genesis 18: 12, Sarah had “waxed old” [BLH / BLTY / בלה / בלתי ]. So old Sarah was not in danger of being raped. (Sarah was almost age 45 in 12-month years [almost age 90 in archaic shaneh], as such being long past the normal child-bearing age in the ancient world.)

2. Lot’s Sodom = Shunem in the Jezreel Valley

Genesis 13: 9-10 tells us where Lot’s Sodom is located. Abram says that if Lot goes north (which Lot does), Abram will go south (which Abram does). Lot lifts up his eyes and, looking north, sees the eastern end of the Jezreel Valley at Beth Shean. The Jezreel Valley is the o-n-l-y place in greater Canaan where, as Genesis 13: 10 explicitly says, this low-lying portion of the Greater Jordan River Valley is “well watered every where”, like the Nile River Valley in Egypt.

3. Time Is Year 13, When Egypt’s Pharaoh Honored Ra

Per Genesis 14: 4, the exact year in question is “Year 13”. To confirm that this is historical Year 13 in the 17-year reign of Egypt’s only pharaoh who semi-monotheistically worshipped Ra, note that all three divinely-changed names in the Patriarchal narratives feature “ra” (an Egyptian-based generic theophoric, which like “El” was broad enough to include YHWH), which on one level intentionally recalls “Ra” (the Egyptian sun-god that Akhenaten honored): Ab – ra – ham; Sa – ra – h; Is – ra – el. (For that matter, e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g about the last 40 chapters of Genesis recalls historical Year 13 in the Amarna Age / mid-14th century BCE / Late Bronze Age.)

4. Historical Revolt of Jezreel Valley in Year 13 Deserved Fire and Brimstone

Now we can ask the historical question. What is by far the biggest event in Canaan proper that is chronicled in the Amarna Letters? It’s the monumental revolt of the eastern Jezreel Valley in Year 13. Yes, the leader of that ill-fated rebellion somewhat oddly was historical Labaya / Biblical Hamor of Shechem (with “Hamor” being an anagram of the logogram spelling of “Labaya”), but the attempt was to make the breadbasket of Canaan, namely the lush Jezreel Valley, into an independent state. If that horrible rebellion had succeeded, Egypt would no longer have been the Protector of Canaan. That in turn would have allowed the Hittite war machine under mighty Hittite King Suppiluliuma (Biblical “Tidal”) to overrun Canaan in Year 14 (after defeating the Hurrian princelings in Syria in Years 13-14 in the Great Syrian War), and then quickly make Canaan into a series of docile Hittite provinces while squelching the Hebrew tent-dwellers. As it was, the defeat of this awful rebellion in Year 13 gave Canaan 500 more years until the Assyrian conquest of Canaan, during which time the Hebrews changed from being tent-dwellers to village-dwellers to city-dwellers and, against all odds, dominated non-coastal Canaan.

Historically, Shunem and the other rebellious cities in the Jezreel Valley were defeated (thank goodness!) in Year 13 by princelings (mainly Hurrian princelings) in Canaan loyal to Egypt. Using great artistic license, chapter 19 of Genesis rhetorically presents the situation as the rebellious Jezreel Valley (Lot’s Sodom) being divinely devastated by the greatest east wind of all time, the mother of all east winds: fire (like the intense heat of the east wind) and brimstone (like the incredible amount of sand from the Syrian Desert that is deposited in Canaan from a strong east wind). The point that the early Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives is making by using this colorful artistic license here is that the defeat of the potentially deadly revolt of the eastern Jezreel Valley in Year 13 was divinely blessed.

* * *

If we can figure out the geographical location of Lot’s Sodom (Shunem in the Jezreel Valley, per Genesis 13: 9-10), then we can discover, to our delight, that the devastation of Lot’s Sodom in chapter 19 of Genesis is very closely based on the historical events of Year 13 in the Jezreel Valley. We simply jettison the bogus scholarly insistence on a “hate Israel, hate Israel, hate Israel” analysis of the mindset of the early Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives (who in fact loved northern Canaan to death, and who never lived in, or south of, Jerusalem). Genesis 13: 9-11 flat out tells us that Lot went north to the Jezreel Valley (via first going east to the Jordan River, and then, after claiming the entire Greater Jordan River Valley north of the Dead Sea, going north to the Jezreel Valley), because the fertile Jezreel Valley is the o-n-l-y place in greater Canaan which, per Genesis 13: 10, is “well watered every where”, like the Nile River Valley in Egypt.

Jim Stinehart

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Isaac Fried » Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:29 pm

Consider this. In Gen. 17:17 we read concerning the birth of Isaac
וַיִּפֹּל אַבְרָהָם עַל פָּנָיו וַיִּצְחָק וַיֹּאמֶר בְּלִבּוֹ הַלְּבֶן מֵאָה שָׁנָה יִוָּלֵד וְאִם שָׂרָה הֲבַת תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה תֵּלֵד
NIV: Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, “Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?”
Namely, he sees the possibility of him having children at this stage of his life as a joke. Yet, in Gen. 25:1-2 we read that at really old age he took a new young wife and had with her a good number of healthy children
וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה וַתֵּלֶד לוֹ אֶת זִמְרָן וְאֶת יָקְשָׁן וְאֶת מְדָן וְאֶת מִדְיָן וְאֶת יִשְׁבָּק וְאֶת שׁוּחַ
NIV: Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah.
how come?

Isaac Fried, Boston University

James Stinehart

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby James Stinehart » Sun Apr 07, 2019 7:56 pm

Isaac Fried:

You wrote: “Consider this. In Gen. 17:17 we read concerning the birth of Isaac
וַיִּפֹּל אַבְרָהָם עַל פָּנָיו וַיִּצְחָק וַיֹּאמֶר בְּלִבּוֹ הַלְּבֶן מֵאָה שָׁנָה יִוָּלֵד וְאִם שָׂרָה הֲבַת תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה תֵּלֵד
NIV: Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, “Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?” Namely, he sees the possibility of him having children at this stage of his life as a joke. Yet, in Gen. 25:1-2 we read that at really old age he took a new young wife and had with her a good number of healthy children
וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה וַתֵּלֶד לוֹ אֶת זִמְרָן וְאֶת יָקְשָׁן וְאֶת מְדָן וְאֶת מִדְיָן וְאֶת יִשְׁבָּק וְאֶת שׁוּחַ
NIV: Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. How come?”

Because, as discussed below, (i) no minor wife, except possibly a minor wife given to Abraham by Sarah herself (Hagar), could bear Abraham a proper male heir, and (ii) Abraham could not sire numerous sons (if even a single son, after Isaac’s birth) after Abraham was age 100 archaic shaneh (age 50 in 12-month years / non-archaic shaneh).

1. Abram Sires Sons by Minor Wives Prior to Births of Ishmael and Isaac

Abram is implied to be age 20 years (in 12-month years) when he marries Sarai (who is age 15). For 17½ long years thereafter, Abram tries to sire a son by his only main wife, Sarai, as his proper male heir. We find out later that during this long period of 17½ years, Abram married several minor wives (excluding Hagar), and had about 10 sons by those minor wives. Because a son borne by a minor wife (at least if that minor wife had not been given to him by Sarai) could not bear Abram a proper male heir, any son borne by such a minor wife was essentially irrelevant to the heirship issue: it only showed that Abram was virile, without solving the heirship problem.

It would not make sense for old Abraham, after Isaac had been born (much less after Sarah had died), to marry several minor wives at that late date, and to have about 10 sons by those minor wives. Abraham already had Isaac as his proper male heir, as vouchsafed by YHWH, and anyway, Abraham was so old after Isaac’s birth that there is no way that Abraham at that point would sire numerous sons by several minor wives.

With that in mind, now consider what Genesis 25: 1, 6 actually says. Here is the NIV translation:

“25 Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. …6 But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.”

Abram had at least three minor wives, including Keturah (and excluding Sarah and Hagar); he married all of such minor wives long before Isaac was born. Abram had approximately 10 sons by these minor wives (excluding Ishmael and Isaac), including 6 named sons by Keturah. All of those sons by minor wives were born before the births of Ishmael and Isaac, when Abram was a realistic age to be siring sons.

2. All Ages in Patriarchal Narratives Are Realistic, Being Set Forth in Terms of Archaic Shaneh (a 6-month “year” concept)

Abram marries at age 20 in 12-month years. For 17½ long years, Abram and Sarai try to have a son, who would be Abram’s proper male heir. Then when Abram is age 37½ in 12-month years (stated age 75 archaic shaneh at Genesis 12: 4), Abram receives the great divine promise that, in due course, Abram will have a proper male heir, who in turn will have many descendants, who will be a blessing to all the world. Sarai is pledged into Pharaoh’s household at age 32½ in 12-month years; Sarai is already past the normal age for childbearing in the ancient world. Sarah is almost age 45 in 12-month years when she is pledged into Abimelek’s household; at that point, Sarah has “waxed old”. Isaac is born when Abraham is age 50 in 12-month years, and Sarah is age 45 in 12-month years, which is about the oldest age a woman could be in the ancient world and bear her first child on a non-miraculous basis. Old Abraham never sires another son after Isaac’s birth.

Sarah dies in good old age at age 63½ in 12-month years. Abraham dies in good old age at age 87½ in 12-month years.

A-l-l of the ages in the Patriarchal narratives are realistic, once one realizes that (i) whereas terms of years are usually set forth in terms of 12-month years / non-archaic shaneh (for example in Egypt, which had no concept of archaic shaneh), (ii) by contrast e-v-e-r-y person’s stated age is always set forth exclusively in terms of archaic shaneh: a 6-month “year” concept.

At the time the Patriarchal narratives were composed, Canaan knew both the archaic shaneh and the non-archaic shaneh concepts. The early Hebrew author of the Patriarchal narratives decided to make use each of these two concepts, each in its proper sphere, in order to double his opportunities to use unobtrusive numerical symbolism. Abram and Sarai try to bear a son for 17½ years (in 12-month years / non-archaic shaneh) before YHWH intervenes. Abraham dies at age 17½ tenfold (in 6-month years / archaic shaneh: 175). The adroit use of both archaic and non-archaic shaneh allows the author twice as many opportunities to highlight the number 17½ in the text. The inordinate focus on the peculiar number 17½ throughout the Patriarchal narratives was deliberately designed to confirm that the Patriarchal Age is the Amarna Age: when Akhenaten reigned more than ½-way through his Regnal Year 17, hence the number 17½. Note that each of Jacob / “Israel” and Akhenaten is an early monotheistic leader of his people in Egypt for 17 years, per Genesis 47: 28. That is not an incredible, mind-boggling “coincidence”. No, that is deliberate.

There’s nothing “crazy” about the Patriarchal narratives, including anyone’s ages, or Abraham’s minor wives and his sons by them. It all makes perfect sense, on all levels, including the historical level.

Jim Stinehart

Saboi
Posts: 450
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 4:06 pm

Re: נְבֵלָה וּטְרֵפָה Lev. 22:8

Postby Saboi » Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:00 am

Leviticus 22:8
נבלה\πάλαιον "of old date, decay through lapse of time"
טרפה\θρύψιν, θρύμμα "that which as broken off, bit"
נבלה וטרפה - "decayed and bitten"

בלה\παλαιός, πάλαος "old in years, mostly of persons, aged"

The Jewish scribes of the Septuagint understood the Hebrew.
Lee Mcgee


Return to “Etymological & Lexicographic Approaches to the Hebrew Bible”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest