Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T23:29:24.858Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Literary Sources of the Temple Scroll

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Andrew M. Wilson  and
Lawrence Wills
Andrew M. Wilson
Affiliation:
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Lawrence Wills
Affiliation:
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Temple Scroll (11 QTemple), the last of the known scrolls from Qumran to be published, is a heterogeneous document whose contents cover various topics of cult, architecture, ritual purity, and civil law. Nonetheless, most exegetes have treated the scroll as the work of a single author. The question whether there might be several independent literary sources behind the document will be the subject of this study.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 75 , Issue 3 , July 1982 , pp. 275 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 All citations are from the editio princeps: Yadin, Yigael, The Temple Scroll (3 vols. plus supplement; Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1977).Google Scholar

2 So, implicitly at least, Maier, Johann, Die Tempelrolle vom Toten Meer (Munich: Reinhardt, 1978) 12–13Google Scholar; A Caquot, , “Le Rouleau du Temple de Qoumrân,” ETR 23 (1978) 448Google Scholar; Levine, Baruch, “The Temple Scroll: Aspects of its Historical Provenance and Literary Character,” BASOR 232 (1978) 17–21. But Yadin (Temple Scroll, 1. 69, 298) leaves the question open.Google Scholar

3 These divisions follow closely those of Maier (Tempelrolle, 14–24).

4 Some exceptions where 11 QTemple retains the third person form of the Deuteronomic source: 54.12–13 is explained by Levine (“Temple Scroll,” 19) as a citation of a liturgical formula (Deut 6:5); 61.3 as an internal quotation on Deuteronomy (a question by the people); and 63.7 as another internal quotation (a declaration by the elders). 55.14 and 63.8 repeat a stock liturgical formula (Deut 6.18 and over twenty times in the OT). 60.21 (tāmîm tihyeh ‘im yhwh 'elôhêkâ) is attested only in Deut 18:13, but it finds echoes throughout the Bible (Gen 17:1; Matt 5:48) and may also qualify as a liturgical formula. In 55.9 kālīl is a technical term meaning “whole burnt offering,” and its use with lěyhwh as a formulaic phrase is a possibility (Deut 13:17; 1 Sam 7:9), but měgûllālê 'elôhîm in 64.12 is nowhere attested in the OT.

5 Levine, “Temple Scroll,” 19–20.

6 29.3–6; 31.9; 45.10, 13b; 46.8, 10–12; 47.4, 11–15; 51.16; 52.4–9, 14–20; 60.7, 10–11.

7 Kutscher, E. Y., The Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (Leiden: Brill, 1974) 41–42, 351–58.Google Scholar

8 Bryn, Gershon, “He‘arot lešoniyot limgillat ha-miqdaš,” Leš 43/1 (1978) 21–28.Google Scholar

9 Yadin, Temple Scroll, 1. 30.

10 Although the compound tense as a replacement for the imperfect to express customary, continuous or repeated action is characteristic of Mishnaic Hebrew (see Segal, M. H., Mishnaic Hebrew Grammar [London: Oxford University, 1958] 54, 150ff.), it does occur occasionally in the OT, especially in late material. However, there appears to be nothing distinctive about its meaning in cols 30–47 which could be explained, e.g., as an attempt to emphasize future repeated action. In several instances the participle plus yhyh is used to prescribe the same sort of ritual observances that are expressed in 13.9–30.2 with a simple tense (e.g., 34.7–8; 43.5–6).Google Scholar

11 Môsěbôt appears in the Temple Scroll at 17.4, 18.13, 21.9, 14, 27.9, 37.8, 9, and 39.9, i. e., in the calendar and “temple and courts” sections; ‘arîm is attested at 47.3, 8, 15, 16, 17; 48.14, 15; 49.4, 5; 57.5; 58.4, 9, 11, 15; 59.4; and 62.12, 13; i. e., in the transition to the purity laws and polity laws sections and in the Torah of the King section. The transitional col. 47 may be a redactional addition to the scroll. Môsěbôt and ‘arîm are not strictly synonymous, but both can be used in relation to the purity laws concerning areas of residence. The use of these terms cannot be explained as a direct borrowing from the MT, because the passages in most cases do not have a direct parallel. In the case of w'hr, we found that whereas 'hr is attested throughout the scroll, w'hr is used only in the festival calendar section (cols. 13.8–30.2). W'hr occurs at 16.10, 18.9, 19.6, 21.6, 23.10, and 24.10, 12, often in the same syntactic position as 'hr is elsewhere. According to BDB, w'hr in the MT is generally found in the laws of P. There are also some unevenly distributed prepositions which would seem at first to be neutral as to content, but they are actually closely related to the subject matter of the passages in which they are found. Both twk (and i t s derivatives) and 'si appear most often in cols. 30–47; the concentration of these prepositions in these columns can be explained, however, by the fact that the former is used in connection with the purity of the temple courts and city, and the latter in describing their physical arrangement.

* We would like to thank Prof. John Strugnell for the many helpful suggestions given by him during the course of researching and writing this article.