¹ Ginzberg, Louis, Legends of the Jews (7 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1908–1938) 5.134n 4. Among those he cites are 2 Bar. 56.6, The Life of Adam and Eve 18, and Jub. 4.1. For a variant understanding of Jubliees see the discussion below. The Life of Adam and Eve is also problematic for Ginzberg. The text Ginzberg cites (chap. 18) declares that Eve was three months pregnant at some unspecified time after the explusion. But, if one adds up the time taken by the events which took place after the expulsion in the first seventeen chapters, Adam and Eve are said to have been out of the Garden for only sixty-three days. If the chronology within the book can be taken seriously, then sexual relations had to take place in the Garden. One might also note that after their expulsion, Adam and Eve began to mourn. The ritual state of mourning entails sexual abstinence making it more unlikely that the pregnancy described in chap. 18 could have resulted from a post-expulsion coital act.Google Scholar

² This was especially true in early Syriac Christianity which did not include Revelation in its canon.

³ Gen. Rab. 34:14. The edition cited is that of Theodor, J. and Albeck, H., Genesis Rabbah (in Hebrew; Jerusalem: Wahrmann, 1965).Google Scholar

⁴ For the text, see 4 (ed. Parisot, J.; 3 vols.; Paris: Firmin-Didot et Socii, 1894) 1Google Scholar.817.1–820.18.

⁵ Patrologia Syriaca, 1. 841.3–9.

⁶ The term is also the title of the Mishnaic tractate concerning marriage law.

⁷ The only exception to this would be the mourner who was abstinent for seven days. But the mourner's uncleanness was not caused by the absence of sexual activity alone.

⁸ This position is argued in Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 5. 134 n. 4 and in idem, Die Haggada bei den Kirchenvätern und in der apokryphischen Literatur (Berlin: Calvary, 1900) 57–58.Google Scholar

⁹ Heinemann, Joseph, ʾAggādôt wě-Tôlědôtêhen (Jerusalem: Keter, 1974)Google Scholar. See also Kugel, James, “Two Introductions to Midrash,” Prooftexts 3 (1981) 131–55.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Indeed, as Heinemann has demonstrated, it can be helpful to begin a tradition-historical investigation of an exegetical theme with the rabbinic materials and then work back through earlier pseudepigraphical works. This is because the rabbinic materials will often single out the particular textual problem(s) that led to the creation of a supplementary tradition. For a good example of this, see James L. Kugel's treatment of the tradition of Joseph's handsome appearance in the work Joseph and Asenath in idem and Greer, Rowan A., Early Bibilical Interpretation (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986) 96–102. The exegetical foundations of the full-blown narrative tradition that is found in this work cannot be appreciated apart from Targumic and rabbinic sources.Google Scholar

¹¹ This motif is also present in Targum Neophyti and the Fragmentary Targum.

¹² The word order is unusual. Generally, when the demonstrative pronoun is used attributively, it follows the noun it modifies. This is true in Hebrew as in Targumic Aramaic; it is not quite as regular in Syriac. In this case, if the demonstrative pronoun is used attributively, its placement before the noun is clearly unusual and emphatic. The emphatic quality of the phrase asks for some sort of interpretation. What is so dramatic about “this (very) time?”

¹³ The selection is taken from chap. 8. For the best edition, see Schechter, Solomon, ed., Aboth de Rabbi Nathan (1887; reprinted New York: Feldheim, 1967)Google Scholar. One should also note the translation and commentary of Saldarini, Anthony J., The Fathers According to Rabbi Natan (SJLA 11; Leiden: Brill, 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴ Gen. Rab. 18:4 moves in other directions: And Adam said: “zōʾt happaʿam …” R. Judah b. Rabbi said: “At first he created her for him and he saw her full of discharge and blood; thereupon he removed her from him and created her a second time. Hence he said “this time she is bone of my bones,” [meaning] this woman is [the creation] of this [second] time. [Another interpretation:] This is she who is destined to strike the bell and to speak against me, as you read, “A golden bell” (Exod 28:34, bell = paʿamôn). [Another interpretation:] It is she who troubled me (měpaʿamtānî) all night … Resh Laqish was asked: “Why do not all other dreams exhaust a man, yet this [dream about a woman] does exhaust a man?” He replied: “Because from the very beginning of her creation she was but in a dream.”

Each of these interpretations takes a different perspective on the phrase zôʾt happaʿam. Only the last is overtly sexual but it does not presume in any way an actual sexual union. It should be noted that the last two interpretations are farther removed from the grammatical problem of the phrase. Rather than focusing on the “at-lastness” or “singularity” of the event, they fancifully interpret happaʿam as though it were a common noun (“bell”) or verb (“to trouble”).

¹⁵ This is taken from Midrash ha-Gadol. See the edition of Eliyahu Rabinowitz (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1932). Also note that Josephus Ant. 34–35 understands this scene in a very similar fashion.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Ps.-Jonathan probably reflects a similar understanding. It translates vs 20 as “He had not found up to this point a mate like himself.” This Targum follows the Hebrew rather literally except for the addition “up to this point.” The most obvious explanation of this addition is the clarity it provides for Adam's subsequent cry in 2:23, “this time, at last!”

¹⁷ Heinemann (ʾAggâdôt wě-Tôlědôtêhen) has shown time and again how an early cause for a particular aggadic narrative can be forgotten in the subsequent elaboration of the interpretive theme.

¹⁸ The text is Jub. 3.2–5a, 6. The translation is that of O. Wintermute in OTP 2. 58–59.

¹⁹ See Levenson, Jon D., Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985) 142Google Scholar–45. He argues that just as the Temple serves to mark out sacred space and is a place of rest (měnûhâh), so the Sabbath serves to mark out sacred time and serves as a period of rest. The correspondences between the creation of the world and the erection of a holy shrine can be seen in these texts, all from the hand of P: Gen 2:1–2 and Exod 39:32; 40:33b–34; Gen 1:31 and Exod 39:43; Gen 2:3 and Exod 39:43, 40:9. Other biblical scholars have noted these similarities. See M. Weinfeld, “Sabbath, Temple and the Enthronement of the Lord,” in Caquot, A. and Delcor, M., eds., Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l'honneur de M. Henri Cazelles (AOAT 212; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1981) 501–12Google Scholar; Blenkinsopp, Joseph, Prophecy and Canon: A Contribution to the Study of Jewish Origins (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977) 59–69Google Scholar. On postbiblical developments see Arthur Green, “Sabbath as Temple: Some Thoughts on Space and Time in Judaism,” in Jospe, Raphael and Fishman, Samuel Z., eds., Go and Study: Essays and Studies in Honor of Alfred Jospe (Washington, DC: B'nai B'rith, 1980) 287–305.Google Scholar

²⁰ A similar understanding of the kingdom (malkûtâʾ in Aramaic) was present among Syriac writers. As Murray, Robert observes (Symbols of Church and Kingdom: A Study in Early Syriac Tradition [London/New York: Cambridge University Press, 1975] 239, 241): “The early Syriac Fathers remained too close to their Judaeo-Christian roots to move far from the primitive totally eschatological sense of malkûtâʾ … [M]alkûtâʾ is sovereignty in this world under God's governance; he gave it once to Israel and now he has given it to the Romans. It may be a title of supremacy, but it is not the Church.”Google Scholar

²¹ Safrai (Safrai, S. and Stern, M., eds., The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural, and Religious Life and Institutions [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976] 2. 205Google Scholar) has asserted that an even stricter position was advocated by the early hasîdîm. He claims that they not only “forbade marital relations on the Sabbath, [but] even remained continent from the preceding Wednesday, so that the woman need not be ritually impure on the Sabbath eve by reason of some residue from intercourse.” One should note, though, that this assertion is dependent on the assumption that the Babylonian Amoraim have misunderstood an early extra-Mishnaic saying from the tannaitic period (baraita). The particular baraita is cited in b. Nid. 38a and declares that sexual relations were forbidden after Wednesday by the early hasîdîm. The Amoraic discussion of the baraita presumes that the reason is based on the calculation of the gestation period of a woman. If one had sex after Wednesday the birth might fall on the Sabbath day. Finkelstein, L. (MGWJ 76 [1932] 529–30)Google Scholar argued that the baraita reflected an earlier, more ascetic branch of Judaism that abstained from sexual relations for three days prior to the Sabbath so as not to enter that holy day in an unclean state. The figure of three days presumably stems from Exod 19:10, 15. This perspective fell out of favor in the rabbinic period, and so the halakha found in this baraita was subject to reinterpretation.

²² So b. Ketub. 62b, b. B. Qama 82a, and p. Ketub. 5.6.

²³ E.g., see m. M. Qatan 3.6.

²⁴ The discussion of what constitutes purity on the festival day or Sabbath is framed in different terms altogether: the laws which pertain to the mourner. The mourner is a suitable model for comparison because the discrete ritual activities which define the mourner are also actions which render one unclean. Thus priests, who must be available for service within the Temple, are restricted as to whom they can mourn (Lev 21:1–6). Moreover, the high priest was not allowed to mourn for anyone, presumably so that he would always be available for cultic service (Lev 21:10–12). The impure state of the mourner is not simply a biblical idea. As Huntington, Richard and Metcalf, Peter illustrate (Celebrations of Death: The Anthropology of Mortuary Ritual [New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979] 64–65), the mourning period is a time of impurity in many cultures. The ritual movement from mourning to joy in the Bible or in rabbinic materials was also a movement from an impure state to a pure one. The Talmud, in fact, explicitly compares the state of the impure leper to that of the mourner (b. M. Qatan 15b). There is one peculiarity about the movement from impurity to purity in the case of the mourner. The movement from mourning to joy allows for the resumption of sexual relations as part of the ritual process. The resumption of sexual relations as a symbolic action denoting the end of mourning can be seen in numerous Semitic materials.Google Scholar

²⁵ Heinemann, Joseph, Prayer in the Talmud: Forms and Patterns (New York: De Gruyter, 1977). His work includes a table of variants for the fourth and fifth blessings, see pp. 74, 290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁶ The use of joy in these various languages is developed in considerable detail in my forthcoming book on the terms for joy in the Semitic languages.

²⁷ E.g., note Isa 25:9; 62:5; 66:10; Joel 2:21, 23; Zeph 3:14; and Zech 2:4. The close association of this eschatological joy with the cultic feast has been observed by Black, Matthew, The Book of Enoch (SVTP 7; Leiden: Brill, 1985) 115–16Google Scholar. The same point has been made about the use of the term “joy” in the kingdom preaching of Jesus. See Jeremias, Joachim, Jesus' Promise to the Nations (London: SCM, 1958) 63 n. 4.Google Scholar

²⁸ This line has been found only in the Old Babylonian recension (Meissner, B., Ein altbabylonisches Fragment des Gilgamosepos (MVAG 7(1); Berlin: Peiser, 1902) III:13)Google Scholar. The Assyrian recension is broken at this point. I include the rather crude reference to “groin” simply to drive home the point that the reference is explicitly sexual in the Akkadian. The understanding of this passage has been hindered by Speiser's more euphemistic rendering (in Pritchard, James B., ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament [3d ed.; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969] 90)Google Scholar of “bosom.” Note also the Akkadian idiom: ulsam epēšu, literally “to do a joy,” idiomatically “to make love.” The same root of ulsam (ʿ-l-s) is employed in the Samaritan Targum with this force. Gen 2:24, “he shall cleave to his wife,” is rendered “he shall rejoice with his wife.”

²⁹ The sexual nuance of the term joy is important for interpreting rabbinic discussions of how the mourner was to act on the feast day (b. M. Qatan 23b). The ritual requirements of the “joy of the feast” took pride of place. This meant that the mourner had to bathe, put on fresh clothes and scented oil, eat and drink and even (according to some) resume sexual relations. These were the discrete behaviors which constituted the ritual state of joy. The Talmud explicitly states: “A mourner does not deport himself as one in mourning during a festival as scripture says: ‘You shall rejoice in the feast’ (Deut 16:14)” (b. M. Qatan 14b). Because the Sabbath and the feast day were so similar in legal thought, the same type of logic applied to the Sabbath. After the Talmud has cited this proof text from Deuteronomy the text then describes the exact behaviors which are forbidden to the mourner, one of which is sexual relations. As could be expected, some rabbinic authorities made the logical inference that the commandment to rejoice on the festival took such precedence that even the mourner was to resume sexual relations during this period. This is a remarkable assertion because the punishment for the mourner who would have sexual relations during this period was terribly severe (b. M. Qatan 24a). Some rabbinic authorities even allowed sexual relations for the mourner on the Sabbath, though others disagreed (p. M. Qatan 3.5; b. M. Qatan 23b-24a). The important point to observe in these discussions is the legal framework in which these issues are discussed. These rabbinic texts outline those discrete behaviors which constitute the state of mourning and those which constitute the state of joy and then attempt to reconcile the conflict which arises when the two states might coincide.

³⁰ In rabbinic law, the seclusion of the bride and groom in the huppâ is not simply the moment of marital intercourse, it is the point of legal acquisition. Note Maimonides' summary: “He who has intercourse with his spouse after betrothal and for the purpose of marriage, acquires her and makes her wedded to him from the moment he initiates intercourse with her, and thereafter she is his wife in every respect.” The text is from Klein, Isaac, trans., The Code of Maimonides, Book 4, The Book of Women (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972) 61. This moment of intercourse under the huppâ may be presumed in an early Syriac hymn which describes the love of the Bridegroom (Christ?) over the Bride (the Church?). Note the Odes of Solomon 42.9: “As the bridechamber (Syriac gnônâʾ) that is spread in the marriage-house, so is my love over those that believe in me.” Murray (Symbols of Church and Kingdom, 132 n. 3) argues that the gnônâʾ is an enclosed tent (like the huppâ) set up in the house of the bridal pair. If Murray is correct, this tent is most likely the place of sexual consummation as well. The sexual resonances of the gnônâʾ (an important technical term in Syriac theology) has not been explored by Syriac scholars.Google Scholar

³¹ See Gen 16:2; 30:3 for a similar usage of bānâh.

³² See the discussion of Murray, Symbols and Church and Kingdom, 137–42.

³³ Note that Jerome often mentioned the Jewish expectation of marital joy in the New Age. In his commentary on Isaiah (CCSL 73A; Tumholt: Brepols, 1968), note his comments on Isa 35:3–10 (p. 427), 58:14 (p. 676), and 60:1–3 (p. 693).

³⁴ See the discussion in Greenfield's, J. article, “A Touch of Eden,” in Orientalia J. Duchesne-Guillemin emirito oblata (Acta Iranica 23; Leiden: Brill, 1984) 219–24.Google Scholar

³⁵ E.g., Lev 26:9, 21–22 and Deut 28:4, 18.

³⁶ Fitzmyer, Joseph A., Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave 1 (2d ed.; Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1971) 87.Google Scholar

³⁷ The form ʿdynty would probably be vocalized ʿadîntî.

³⁸ Greenfield argues in “A Touch of Eden” that the term ought to be understood differently. He notes the Talmudic text which contrasts the skin of youth (nitʿaddēn), which is smooth, moist, and fresh, with the skin of old age, which is wrinkled and dry (nitballâh) (b. B. Mesia 87a). Greenfield also compares this text to the tradition of Jochabed's miraculous rejuvenation which resulted in the birth of Moses when she was 130-years-old. The text states, “the signs of youth were reborn in her, the flesh was refreshed [nitʿaddēn habbāśār], the wrinkles were straightened and beauty returned to its place” (b. B. Bathra 120a). The same semantic contrast is found in this text from Genesis. Sarah is old and wom out (bālâh), wonders whether she can become like the young (ʿdn). Greenfield believes that Sarah is questioning whether she can achieve the youthful appearance again which is appropriate to child-bearing.

³⁹ See, e.g., b. Sanh. 38b and Gen. Rab. 22:2).

⁴⁰ The expected word order would be verb and then noun. This verse begins with the sequence noun, verb.

⁴¹ J. Tigay, “Paradise,” EncJud, 13. 79.

⁴² See the comments of Ginzberg, Legends of the Jews, 5. 134–35 n. 5 in regard to Midrash Aggada to Gen 4:1. This text was unavailable to me.

⁴³ For asceticism in Syriac Christianity, see Adam, A., “Grundbegriffe des Mönchtums in sprachlicher Sicht,” ZKG 65 (1953–1954) 209–39Google Scholar; Beck, E., “Ein Beitrag zur Terminologie des ältesten syrischen Mönchtums,” in Antonius Magnus Eremita (StAns 38; Rome, 1956)Google Scholar; Kretschmar, G., “Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung fr¨hchristlicher Askese,” ZThK 61 (1964) 27–67Google Scholar; and Nagel, Peter, Die Motivierung der Askese in der alten Kirche und der Ursprung des Mönchtums (TU 95; Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1966).Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Murray, Symbols of Church and Kingdom, 1–38. Also see the discussions in Guillaumont, A., “Monachisme et éthique judéo-chrétienne,” in Judéo-Christianisme: Recherches historiques el théologiques offertes en hommage au Cardinal Jean Danielou (Paris: Recherches de Science Religieuse, 1972) 199–218Google Scholar, and Fraade, Steven D., “Ascetical Aspects of Ancient Judaism,” in Arthur Green, ed., Jewish Spirituality from the Bible through the Middle Ages (New York: Crossroad, 1986) 283–84 n. 60.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ One should note the important criticisms of Schiffman, Lawrence H., Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Courts, Testimony, and the Penal Code (BJS 33; Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 13, 19, 214–15Google Scholar. He has argued that the Qumran community was not celibate on the basis that the Rule of the Congregation and the Zadokite Document both assume marriage as a normal institution in the sect. One should note, though, that Schiffman also questions the assumption that the Qumran covenanters should be identified with the Essenes (ibid., 1). This allows him to take less seriously the collaborative evidence of Josephus and Philo that the sect did have celibate members. For other treatments of the problem of celibacy at Qumran see Marx, A., “Les racines du célibat essénien,” RQ 7 (1970) 323–42Google Scholar; Guillaumont, A., “À propos du célibat des Esséniens,” in Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1971) 395–404Google Scholar; Hübner, H., “Zölibat in Qumran?” NTS 17 (1971) 153–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Coppens, J., “Le célibat essénien,” in M. Delcor, ed., Qumrân, sa piété, sa théologie et son milieu (Paris: Duculot, Gembloux. 1978).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See the discussion of this text in Murray, Robert, “The Exhortation to Candidates for Ascetical Vows at Baptism in the Ancient Syriac Church,” NTS 21 (1974–1975) 60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Murray and others have suggested that the context of this early homily was an ancient Christian baptismal rite. If this is correct, then it is possible that this homily represents a stage in the early Syriac church in which celibacy was required for baptism into the “covenant.” One should note, though, that this is very speculative and does not evolve out of a simple reading of the text. Some scholars of Syriac Christianity doubt whether celibacy ever was a criterion for baptism (so Sidney Griffith, oral communication). On the question of celibacy and baptism see Vööbus, Arthur, Celibacy, a Requirement for Admission to Baptism in the Early Syrian Church (Stockholm: Estonian Theological Society in Exile, 1951)Google Scholar; Connolly, R. H., “Aphraates and Monasticism,” JTS 6 (1905) 529Google Scholar; Gribomont, J., “Le monachisme au sein de l'Église en Syrie et en Cappadoce,” Studia Monastica 7 (1965) 2–24; and Guillaumont, “Monachisme et éthique judéb-chrétienne.”Google Scholar

⁴⁷ The translation is that of Robert Murray and was taken from his “Exhortation to Candidates,” 61. The text can be found in Patrologia Syriaca 1. 341:11–26.

⁴⁸ The Syriac fathers have understood this term along the lines of its usage in Exod 9:10, 15, that is, as a term which entails sexual continence. The opposite connotation exists in Talmudic Aramaic and Mishnaic Hebrew. There the term refers to the state of marriage.

⁴⁹ On these three technical uses see Murray, “Exhortation to Candidates,” 13 n. 3.

⁵⁰ As Douglas has observed (Purity and Danger, 51–52), the law entails that one is not fit for holy war if one has commenced an important activity but not finished it. This position of being betwixt and between is the very essence of the ritual experience of liminality and the liminal state is almost always an impure one. In the present context, the state of being betwixt and between would be most incongruent with the call to become “single” (ʾîhîdāyûtâʾ) in Christ.

⁵¹ So the MT, LXX, and T. Onkelos. The Vg, Peshittaʾ Ps.-Jonathan, and the Samaritan Targum read: “he shall rejoice with his wife.” The text from Aphrahat presumes the reading of the Peshitta, Palestinian Targumic tradition, and Jerome.

⁵² Though Aphrahat, and later Ephrem, would still see celibacy as the highest state of the Christian, they would not say that sexually active married individuals could not be baptized.

⁵³ This point is subject to debate: see n. 46.

⁵⁴ Murray, “Exhortation to Candidates,” 15.

⁵⁵ From this point on, our discussion of Ephrem will center on his Hymns on Paradise. See the edition of Beck, Edmund, Hymnen de Paradiso und Contrary Julianum (CSCO 174; Louvain: Secrétariat du Corpus SCO, 1957)Google Scholar. A good study of the sanctuary motif is that of Séd, N., “Les hymnes sur le Paradis de Saint Ephrem et les traditions juives,” Le Muséon 81 (1968) 454–501Google Scholar. Two recent studies of Ephrem's treatment of the material in Genesis are Hidal, Sten, Interpretatio Syriaca (Lund: Gleerup, 1974)Google Scholar, and Kronholm, Tryggve, Motifs from Genesis 1–11 in the Genuine Hymns of Ephrem the Syrian (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1978). The former work uses the commentaries while the latter work uses the hymns.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Levenson, Jon D., The Theology of the Program of Restoration of Ezekiel 40–48 (HSM 10; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976) 25–36.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ The word “sanctuary” is singular in the Syriac Peshitta, plural in the MT.

⁵⁸ The model is that of the Day of Atonement wherein the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies once every year with his shovel of coals and incense. See Lev 16:1–3; Heb 9:1–7, and the description of the rites of the High Priest in m. Yoma.

⁵⁹ See b. Sotah 10a and parallels.

⁶⁰ This document is attributed to Ephrem, but does not derive from him. A critical Syriac and Arabic text were published by Carl Bezold in 1888. See the recent reprint. Die Schatzhöhle (Amsterdam: Philo, 1981)Google Scholar. The work was translated into English by Budge, E. A. Wallis, The Book of the Cave of Treasures (London: Religious Tract Society, 1927)Google Scholar. According to A. Götze it probably dates to a time not long after Aphrahat (Die Schatzhöhle: Überlieferung und Quellen [Heidelberg: Carl Winter, 1922])Google Scholar. This late fourth century (perhaps early fifth century) dating is accepted by Murray, Symbols of Church and Kingdom, 19. It is a very important work for it provides an example of what a popular homiletic reading of the Bible might have looked like. Moreover it is an important witness to the Christian roots of Islamic traditions about the biblical prophets. On this topic see Thackston, W. M., Tales of the Prophets of al Kisaʾi (Boston: Twayne, 1978) XIII-XIV, xxii–xxiv.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Bezold, Die Schatzhöhle, 18–20.

⁶² The Arabic translation of the Syriac original is quite free and expansive. Indeed, it is often a type of midrash on the Syriac. This text has received almost no attention by scholars. A thorough treatment of the MSS can be found in Götze, Die Schatzhöhle, 23–38. He dates the work to around 750 CE.

⁶³ In Arabic also, the term for rejoice, faraha, is not used freely. It is particularly associated with the joy of festive occasions like weddings. My colleague D. Crow has informed me that this term is used in colloquial Egyptian Arabic to this day in a blessing recited over a newly married couple. One often wishes that the couple experience a thousand joys. The sense of such a blessing is not a general desire for a happy marriage; rather it is the hope that the couple will experience a thousand sexual unions that result in children. The invoking of this blessing can often embarrass the newly married couple, especially in an age of birth control. The meaning of the term joy in this Arabic marriage blessing is very similar to the meaning of joy in the Jewish blessing discussed at the beginning of this article.

⁶⁴ The grammar of this Arabic text is colloquial Christian Arabic and not classical Arabic. As a result some of the verbal forms are unusual. I have parsed this verb as a third form, perfect, in the dual. As a result I have ignored the final hamia.

⁶⁵ As Murray observes (Symbols of Church and Kingdom, 255), one can detect in Syriac Christianity the concept that “life in the Church is an anticipation of paradise” and so the state of virginity anticipates “the ‘angelic’ state in the heavenly wedding-feast and bridechamber.”