I have been on the Chabad mailing list for many years. I'm always telling myself that I'm going to unsubscribe, but somehow I never do. The truth is that they sometimes send me some pretty interesting things. So it was recently, when they sent me "14 Facts About the Book of Psalms." I couldn't resist this, since the Psalms (Tehillim) are an interest of mine. #10 on their list is the "Fun Fact" that Psalm 145, which is an alphabetic acrostic, is missing the verse that should begin with the Hebrew letter "nun."
I had been aware of this, and in fact I had even written about it before, but this article got me thinking about it again. As mentioned in an endnote to the Chabad article, this problem is mentioned in the Talmud (Berachot 4:b), where a solution is put into the lips of Rabbi Yohanan, who lived in the late third century CE. The explanation given there was that the omission was intentional, since "nun" is the first letter of "nawflah" (fallen) in Amos 5:2, where it says "The virgin of Yisra'el is fallen, she shall no more rise..." But this strikes me as a silly explanation, since there are many Hebrew words that begin with "nun," and many of them are suitable for glorifying God.
But the "nun" verse is not present in the Aleppo Codex, nor the Leningrad Codex, the best and oldest codices we have of the Masoretic Text. It is, however, present in the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation used by the Jews of Alexandria around 150 BCE, which is almost a thousand years older than the Masoretic Text. It is also in the Latin of the Vulgate, which dates to the late fourth century, and in the Syriac of the Peshitta, which dates to the fifth century CE. But until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the mid-twentieth century, we had no ancient example of the missing verse in Hebrew. Now we do.
The above is a photograph of the main Dead Sea Psalms Scroll (11QPs-a). I have underlined the previously missing verse. Transcribed into more modern Hebrew letters, it says:
No comments:
Post a Comment