Hebrew Scriptures

pl.n. Bible
The Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings, forming the covenant between God and the Jewish people that is the foundation and Bible of Judaism while constituting for Christians the Old Testament. Also called Hebrew Bible.

View more Religion & Spirituality videos

The common English designation for the Hebrew Scriptures. "The Bible" is derived from the Greek biblia (lit. "the books"). This term is the precise equivalent of the Hebrew Ha-Sefarim ("the books"), which is commonly used to refer to the sacred writings in rabbinic literature. Evidently this usage was widespread even earlier among Hellenistic Jews who translated it into the Greek vernacular.

Other Hebrew names, Sifré ha-Kodesh ("the Holy Books") or Kitvé ha-Kodesh ("the Holy Writings"), were current from ancient times down to the Middle Ages. These terms underscore two central concepts concerning the text: its Divine inspiration and its definitive written form. The characterization of the Bible as written is complemented by another term, Mikra (lit. "reading"), which highlights the vocal manner of study and points to the fact that the Scriptures were read publicly as part of the liturgical service.

The popular Hebrew designation Tanakh is an acronym (TaNaKh) composed of the initial letters of the names of the three divisions of the Hebrew Bible, Torah (Pentateuch), Nevi'im (Prophets), Ketuvim (Hagiographa). The Christian term "Old Testament" is used to distinguish the Hebrew Scriptures from the New Testament.

The biblical text is written in the Hebrew language, with the exception of two words in Genesis (31:47), one verse in Jeremiah (10:11), and sections of the books of Daniel (2:46-7:25) and Ezra (4:8-6:18, 7:12-26), which are in Aramaic. The Hebrew of the Bible is not uniform, since it reflects many historical periods and preserves different strata of language, and even different dialects.

Contents The Hebrew Bible consists of three divisions.

1. Pentateuch (Torah). This comprises the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Jewish tradition ascribed authorship of the entire Pentateuch to Moses, although the Scriptures themselves make no such explicit claim. This is best explained as an inference from Moses' role as lawgiver, and is most probably based on passages such as Deuteronomy 31:9-12. The basic meaning of Torah, however, is "instruction" and is in no way limited to legal or ritual prescriptions.

The Five Books constitute a complete uninterrupted narrative beginning with the creation of the world and the patriarchal history, through the Law-giving at Sinai, until Moses' death before Israel's entry into Canaan (see Pentateuch). With the increased circulation of the Pentateuch from the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, the narrative was divided into five parts, and was conventionally transcribed on five different scrolls for convenience. Thereafter the work became known as "the five-volumed book" (Heb. Ḥamishah Humshé Torah, lit. "the five fifths of the Torah"), later, popularly among Jews, "the Ḥumash," whose Greek and ultimately English equivalent is "Pentateuch."

The Hebrew names of the Five Books, Be-Reshit, Shemot, Va-Yikra, Be-Midbar, Devarim, are derived from the initial words or first significant word of each book. The English titles, on the other hand, are borrowed from the Greek and Latin translations of the Bible and reflect the major theme or content of each book. They, in turn, can be traced back to Hebrew names used for these books as reflected in early rabbinic literature.

2. Prophets (Nevi'im). The appellation "Prophets" has been variously explained. The authorship of the books was traditionally ascribed to prophets: "Joshua wrote the book which bears his name ... Samuel wrote the book which bears his name and the Book of Judges ... Jeremiah wrote the book which bears his name and the Book of Kings ..." (BB 14b). An alternate explanation is that prophets (e.g., Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah) figure centrally in the narrative of the "Former Prophets" (or "pre-classical prophets"), which is essentially an interpretation of Israel's history from the perspective of prophetic teaching.

The second division of the Bible is subdivided into two sections. The name "Former Prophets" applies to the narrative-historical works Joshua, Judges, Samuel (I and II), and Kings (I and II). These form a continuation of the Pentateuch, by picking up the narrative thread where it was cut off. The books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel trace the history of Israel from the conquest of Canaan and the period of the Judges through the establishment of the Monarchy in the times of Saul and David. The Book of Kings presents a history of the two Kingdoms of Israel and Judah until Jerusalem's downfall in 586 BCE. The narratives were edited to link one book to the next, and the result is a continuous literary work, unfolding in a clear chronological sequence. Their separation into four books may be a later development.

The "Latter Prophets" (or "classical prophets") consists of the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve "Minor Prophets" (Aram. Teré Asar ---"the Twelve"): Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. This is an assemblage of works which span the eighth to fifth centuries BCE, i.e., the latter ages of the monarchies of Israel and Judah, the Babylonian Exile<temple period. The designation "Minor Prophets" refers to the length of the books and not to their relative significance. These shorter books came to be gathered and written together on one scroll to ensure their preservation, and were consequently counted as one book rather than twelve.

Aside from original prophetic utterances preserved and recorded in literary (generally poetic) form, some of the books occasionally contain biographical and historical material pertaining to the lives and activities of the prophets, along with their teachings and public addresses. The order of the first three books as given here, and as present in most manuscripts, is chronological, although some sources deviate from this sequence for various reasons (cf. BB 14b). The Minor Prophets were invariably placed at the end of the collection, even though some of the individual prophets predate Isaiah.

3. Hagiographa (Ketuvim). The third division of the Bible is a collection of diverse literary genres including liturgical poetry (Psalms and Lamentations); love poetry (Song of Songs); Wisdom Literature (Proverbs, Job, and Ecclesiastes); historical books (Ruth, Chronicles (I and II), Esther, Ezra, and nehemiah); and the book of daniel, which mingles history, prophecy, and apocalypse. The all-inclusive Hebrew term Ketuvim (lit. "Writings") suits the miscellaneous nature of the corpus. The order of the books in Ketuvim was not firmly established, as can be seen by the varying traditions in the Greek Bible as to their sequence and arrangement. Hebrew manuscripts and editions vary as well, though to a lesser degree. Five of the books of Ketuvim, traditionally called the FIVE SCROLLS (Megillot), are customarily read in the synagogue on festival days: the Song of Songs on passover, Ruth on shavu'ot, Lamentations on tishah be-av, Ecclesiastes on sukkot, and Esther on purim. Subsequently, these books formed a subgrouping, and were arranged in this order, although an alternate order reflects the relative chronology of their reputed authors. Despite this evident fluidity, the Book of Chronicles came to occupy the final position in the Hagiographa. Scholars have noted the structural affinities between Chronicles and Genesis, the first book of the Bible. Both books relate the beginnings of mankind and end in anticipation of the return to the Land of Israel. Balancing Genesis with Chronicles served to create an overall unifying literary theme for the entire Bible.

Most ancient Jewish sources specify the sum total of biblical books as 24. There is no clear indication whether this number bore special significance, yet it seems to have been derived somewhat artificially by counting the Minor Prophets as one book and regarding Ezra and Nehemiah originally as one work. The subdivision of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles into two books each is a later development. A variant reckoning of 22 books is attested to by Josephus (Against Apion 1:38-42), probably to be explained by attaching Ruth to Judges and Lamentations to Jeremiah, a practice which has survived in the Greek and Latin translations of the Bible.

The division of the Bible into three distinct corpora would seem to imply a categorization of its contents. However, this does not strictly classify the books according to genre or style. According to the prevalent scholarly view, the division delineates three progressive stages in the evolvement of the Canon.

Canon The term "canon" refers to the closed and authoritative nature of a corpus of sacred writings. The biblical books are considered binding by various religious communities because of the belief that they have been Divinely revealed or inspired. The concept of canon is central to understanding how the Bible became the focus of Jewish life, making Israel "the People of the Book" and infusing its teachings, values, and national ethic into the fabric of the nation's being.

The word "canon," borrowed from Semitic usage, originally meant "reed" or "cane" (Heb. kaneh), and hence "measuring rod." It came to be used in the abstract sense of a measure of excellence, and was thus first applied to the Scriptures by the Church Fathers. Jewish sources also acknowledge the concept of "canon" or "canonicity." This is inferred, on the one hand, by the category of Sefarim Ḥitsonim (lit. "External Books," see, e.g., San. 10:1), which was applied to all literary works that were not canonical (see APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHA), and, on the other hand, by two technical Hebrew expressions---metamé et ha-yadayim ("renders the hands unclean"), which refers to the rabbinic injunction that anyone who touched a biblical book contracted ritual uncleanness, and GENIZAH, the storing away of sacred books (and other artifacts) which could no longer be used. These phrases are employed in rabbinic discussions questioning the canonicity of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and Esther.

It is clear that not all of the literature of ancient Israel has survived, and the Scriptures themselves refer to various contemporary books or records which were lost. Such works are: "The Book of the Wars of the Lord" (Num. 21:14); "The Book of Jashar" (Josh. 10:13; II Sam. 1:18); and "The Chronicles of the Kings of Israel/Judah" (e.g., I Kings 14:19, 29). This fact can be partly explained as accident, but nonetheless the idea of a canon implies a process whereby certain books were consciously rejected, while others were considered sacred books and therefore formally canonized. However, many factors operating over time contributed to the gradual recognition of certain works over others. Temple liturgy, by virtue of its cultic function, and other texts related intrinsically to the cult (such as the priestly codes), were revered and carefully transmitted within Temple circles. Narratives which encompassed the national past and testified to God's covenant with Israel soon achieved an elevated rank and were considered a Divine legacy. Prophetic addresses were naturally recorded and preserved by groups of adherents. Sometimes individual books were accepted as canonical, yet were not included in a given corpus for an extended period of time. For example, much of the Psalter was probably in existence and sanctified for centuries before the canonization of the Book of Psalms, let alone the canonization of the Hagiographa. It is important, therefore, to distinguish between the various processes involved. Upon canonization of a book, its literary growth came to an end, and it was henceforth only to be transmitted textually by scribes and copyists. With the canonization of a corpus, a boundary was set and no further books were to be included. In all cases, the common belief in the Divine inspiration of these writings was a prerequisite for canonicity.

The present form of the Canon was determined by a complex historical and literary process. Although sources from the Hellenistic period provide some evidence concerning the latter stages of this process, information for the earlier periods is scant and inconclusive. Therefore, any reconstruction will remain largely a matter of conjecture. The tripartite division of the Canon is considered by most scholars to be the result of a historical development; the three divisions attained canonical status one by one at successive historical stages.

One of the most significant accounts concerning the canonization of the Pentateuch is in II Kings 22-23. In the 18th year of King josiah's reign (622 BCE), a previously neglected "book of the Torah" (or "Book of the Covenant") was discovered in the Temple by the High Priest and read before the king. The book was immediately recognized as authentic, and shortly thereafter was read aloud in a national covenant ceremony. The description of the subsequent cultic reform complies exactly with the central instruction of the Book of Deuteronomy, and therefore this event is usually seen as the formal canonization of that book. The next record of a public reading of the Torah, at the time of ezra (c. 444 BCE), is found in Nehemiah 8-10. The ceremony is described as taking place in response to the people's demand that "the Book of the Torah of Moses" be read to them. Hence, it must be assumed that the book was known and that its final compilation had already been accomplished in the Babylonian Exile, before the Return to Zion. The request was carried out by Ezra, who is described as a "scribe, expert in the Torah of Moses." Ezra's main contribution was in promoting the teaching and interpretation of the Torah, and elevating it to its unique position in Jewish life.

The second stage of the canonization of the Bible began with the collection of the prophetic literature, which had been preserved since the days of the First Temple, together with the books of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, whose activity was inspired by the events surrounding the Return to Zion and the reconstruction of the Temple. A widely evidenced rabbinic tradition states that these prophets were the last to be endowed with the HOLY SPIRIT (Heb. ru'aḥ ha-kodesh). Other sources, too, intimate that the social and religious institution of prophecy was gradually losing its vitality and credibility during the Second Temple period. The prophetic canon was probably sealed before the end of the Persian empire. Moreover, the prophetic corpus betrays no Greek influence and the historical horizon of the books only extends as far as the era of Persian hegemony.

Sources from the Hellenistic period show that the threefold division of the Bible was by then well established. All refer to the Law and the Prophets as such, yet the third category had no commonly recognized name, but was rather given different descriptions, such as "the wisdom of the ancients," "the Psalms and other writings," or "the remaining books." This evidence all points to the fact that the Hagiographa was a rather amorphous group of writings for a considerable length of time after the canonization of the Prophets, and was not finally closed until well into the Greco-Roman period. It is notable that the Hagiographa contains works that were contemporaneous with some of the later prophetic books, but were excluded from the second collection because of their non-prophetic character. On the other hand, some books were written too late to be included. This explains why the Book of Daniel, which contains a great deal of prophecy, was nevertheless included in the Hagiographa, since it is a product of the later Hellenistic period and is also the only biblical book to contain Greek words.

A number of facts seem to indicate that there were divergent canonical traditions in the Jewish community of the late Second Temple period. Some controversy surrounding the canonicity of several books (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Esther) still reverberates in rabbinic discussions from the tannaitic and amoraic periods (see, e.g., Yad. 3:5, Meg. 7a). The Book of Ben Sira (ecclesiasticus) enjoyed a quasi-canonical status in the community until the rabbis explicitly declared it uncanonical (Tosef Yad. 2:13). Many of the original works composed in this period, which might have been possible candidates for inclusion in the Hagiographa, have survived only because of their acceptance within the Hellenistic canon and from there into the canon of the Christian Church. These works (e.g., the Books of maccabees, esdras, enoch, etc.) are known today mainly through the Greek translations. Some scholars consider the Hellenistic canon to reflect a Jewish canonical tradition current in Erets Israel and Alexandria at the time that the Greek translations of the Bible were made. The sectarian community at Qumran appears to have had an entirely different attitude towards the Scriptures. Their collection of writings was much more comprehensive, containing many sectarian compositions unknown before the discovery of the DEAD SEA SCROLLS. As to the normative Jewish canon, talmudic discussions frequently point back to the rabbinic council at Yavneh (c. 90 CE) as the time when final decisions were made concerning the status of the controversial books. Yet the continuing interest in this question on the rabbis' part suggests that even after that event the boundary was not quite fixed, and not until the middle of the second century CE was there unshaken agreement as to the scope of the Hagiographa.

For the large community of "hellenized" Jews in Alexandria, the language of the Bible was no longer familiar as it had been to their ancestors. Around the third century BCE, the community undertook to render the Scriptures into Greek, and the result was the translation known as the SEPTUAGINT. This differs from the Hebrew canon in two major respects (aside from the textual one). It includes many works which were rejected from the normative Jewish canon and considered "external" by the rabbis of Erets Israel. Secondly, the Greek canon preserves a different arrangement of the books. These are distributed among four classes (as opposed to the conventional three): Torah , History, Poetic and Didactic Literature, and Prophecy.

Text The text of the Hebrew Bible, as it is printed in modern editions and as it has been known from the Middle Ages onward, is composed of three graphic elements: (1) the consonants, (2) the vowel signs, (3) the accentuation marks. The last serve for the musical-liturgical reading of the Scriptures and also have an exegetical function in interpreting each verse. Both the vowel signs and the accentuation marks are secondary additions to the consonantal text. They were introduced by the Masoretes in the Middle Ages to preserve the oral tradition of vocalization, pronunciation, and chanting which had always accompanied the written words (see CANTILLATION). In the earlier periods only the consonantal text existed, and the other elements had no graphic representation.

The earliest medieval texts preserved are from the ninth century onward, and they all reflect the textual tradition known as the Masoretic Text. Among manuscripts of this type, many textual variants may be found, but these are largely variations of spelling or of grammatical form, and the majority are of trivial significance. By this time, the text had long become standardized and stabilized by a complex critical process.

In contrast to this uniformity, the prior history of the consonantal text attests to much diversity. The evidence for this derives from a variety of sources (called textual witnesses), but an overview readily reveals that in the early stages of textual transmission many different types of texts were circulating, each exhibiting its own variant readings. These variants are not limited merely to minute particulars such as orthography or grammatical forms, but include more significant divergences, such as different wording, synonymous readings, a different ordering of verses or of entire episodes, an expansive or embellished text versus a laconic one, and occasionally one version may contain information not preserved elsewhere.

The earliest evidence of this type is found within the Bible itself, where several passages are duplicated (yet not without textual divergences) in other books, e.g., the two versions of the Decalogue, Exodus 20:2-14 = Deuteronomy 5:6-19; the Assyrian siege of Jerusalem, II Kings 18:13-20:19 = Isaiah 36-39; the eschatological vision in Isaiah 2:2-4 = Micah 4:1-3; and the parallels between Samuel-Kings and Chronicles. These examples show that wide discrepancies existed in different versions of the text, even when biblical literature was still in its formative stages.

The Samaritan Pentateuch (see SAMARITANS) is a Hebrew text of the first five books of the Bible, which was preserved within the Samaritan community as their canon. This text first came to the attention of European scholars in the 17th century. Although it contains several secondary features which are easily recognized as ideological additions or corrections, its intrinsic nature is not sectarian. Ever since the discovery of prototypes of this text among the Dead Sea Scrolls, it has become clear that it was only one of several types of text current among Jews in Erets Israel in the Second Temple period. Later developments brought about its disappearance from Jewish circles. The text differs from the Masoretic text in its tendency to harmonize inconsistencies or points of variance between different descriptions of the same subject, or between repeated episodes in the narrative. Nonetheless, many of the textual variants have important value.

Another type of textual witness are the ancient translations of the Bible. These often reveal that the original Hebrew underlying the translation was not identical to the Masoretic Text. This evidence is not always clear-cut, however, since the original Hebrew can only be hypothetically reconstructed. The most ancient translation, and therefore the most important, is the Septuagint, which provides rich and varied material invaluable for textual criticism. The Aramaic TARGUM "translations", even those which are literal and not Midrashic, have less importance in this respect. Other early translations are the Latin "Vulgate" and the Syriac "Peshitta."

Of all the textual witnesses, the most important are the biblical scrolls and fragments discovered in caves at the site of Qumran in the Judean Desert in the 1940s and '50s. The discovery of the dead Sea Scrolls brought to light the earliest extant manuscripts of biblical literature, predating the medieval codices by over a thousand years. Hundreds of fragments were found, representing the whole range of biblical books with the exception of Esther. Some of the older scrolls are written in the paleo-Hebrew script. The scrolls span a period of a few hundred years from the first settlement at Qumran in the third century BCE until its abandonment in 70 CE, with the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. They provide direct and unmistakable evidence for the textual reality of the Second Temple period, and since the earlier scrolls were brought to the site from afar, they testify not only for the minority group residing at Qumran but also for the Jewish population of the country at large. Prototypes of all the major textual traditions known to scholars were found at Qumran (Masoretic Text, Samaritan Pentateuch, and Septuagint), and also texts belonging to independent traditions that cannot be classified along with texts previously known.

The last type of evidence are the many citations of biblical verses in works from the period of the Second Temple (e.g., in philo, Josephus, the New Testament), including the rabbinic literature containing hundreds of quotations from Scripture, some of which include genuine textual variants.

The rabbinic sources also supply a few descriptions of scribal activities in transmitting the text. One such account tells of several tikkuné soferim ("scribal corrections") in the text, another of maggihé sefarim ("book revisers"). Also preserved were traditions of an official Temple scroll which was used as a standard for correction. These sources reveal some of the processes which brought about the exclusive preservation of the Masoretic Text. By the end of the first century CE, it had become the only authorized text, while all the other traditions seem to have been neglected, rejected, or forgotten. At this time the text had already become fixed, even to the extent of the number of words and letters. This is indicated by the activities of the soferim ("counters"), who established the middle words and letters and the total number of words in each book, and thus created a critical apparatus for the accurate duplication of the text in transmission. The movement from plurality to uniformity was undoubtedly motivated by the idea of canonicity, which had come to emphasize the precise original form of the Divine word. The historical circumstances, namely the national emergency in the first and second centuries CE, enhanced the need for religious and communal solidarity; the unity of the text was one way sought to achieve this.

Scientific Study of the Bible The antecedents of modern biblical scholarship can be found in sources from late antiquity to the Middle Ages, where students of the Bible, whether Jewish, Hellenistic, Christian, KARAITE, or Muslim, addressed themselves to problems arising from contradictions, inconsistencies, or difficulties in the text. An apt example is one of the more radical statements made by a talmudic sage: "The Torah was given scroll by scroll" (Git. 60a). While such discussions induced Jewish scholars to develop the principles of HERMENEUTICS with which to resolve such problems in the text, others, such as certain Hellenistic philosophers or Muslim polemicists, wished to aim a critique against the authenticity of the Bible. The medieval exegete Abraham IBN EZRA (1092-1167) is exceptional in this respect, for he appears to have hinted, albeit in obscure and allusive language, at a number of anachronisms in the Pentateuch which could undermine the assumption of Mosaic authorship (for those passages, at least). He also discerned the work of a second prophet in the latter half of the Book of Isaiah.

The emergence of biblical criticism proper in the modern era is associated with the name of Baruch spinoza (1632-1677), who advocated a rational-historical approach to the Holy Scriptures. He urged that the Scriptures be studied, as any other document, only by reference to their own content and independent of tradition. Pursuing Ibn Ezra's lead, he openly took issue with the hitherto inviolable belief in Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. During the ages following Spinoza, biblical scholarship concerned itself primarily with the question of the composition of the Pentateuch. The initial direction was given when scholars noticed the alternation of Divine Names in the Pentateuch and used this as a key to discerning different literary strata. Other scholars expanded this sort of inquiry, employing other criteria, such as differing styles, phraseology, theological outlook, doublets, or signs of editorial activity, to unravel the different strands in the narrative. The same methods were also applied to the rest of biblical literature. The culmination of these scholarly efforts was the consolidation of what is known as the Documentary Hypothesis, which isolated four distinct written sources through literary-critical analysis, each of which contained a narrative element and a body of laws which were combined to create the Pentateuch. These are designated the Jahwist (J), so called because of its usage of Yahweh for the Divine Name; the Elohist (E), for its use of Elohim for God; Deuteronomy (D); and the Priestly Document (P). This, too, was their purported chronological order. After various preliminary recensions, the Torah was supposed to have been finally edited by a priestly editor in the post-Exilic age. Although most of its central theses were propounded before him, the German scholar Julius Wellhausen added historical-evolutionist arguments that gave this theory a persuasiveness and finality which remained uncontested for a long time afterwards. The classical formulation of the Documentary Hypothesis has since been modified, but its essential propositions are still defended by most scholars. Nonetheless, many have criticized it on the grounds that its arguments are circular, that it is based largely on speculative assumptions about the development of religious thought and practice and has thereby forced true evidence to conform to a conjectured historical scheme. The Italian-born Israeli scholar Mosheh David (Umberto) Cassuto disputed the theory in its entirety, while two other Jewish scholars, David Tsevi Hoffmann and Yeḥezkel kaufmann, criticized the dating of the priestly writing to the post-Exilic era and argued that they enjoy even greater antiquity than the Book of Deuteronomy.

The next pivotal shift in biblical scholarship was made by Hermann Gunkel, who examined the prehistory of the written documents, and tried to explore the origins of biblical literature in the phases before it was committed to writing. Gunkel proposed to identify the different genres of literature in the Bible by learning to recognize each one's characteristic forms, patterns, and mood. He believed each genre to be the product of a unique "life setting" (Sitz im Leben) or social (and often cultic) context, in which a specific form of literary expression was created and performed at recurrent intervals. This method is known as "Form Criticism." The classification of the Psalms remains Gunkel's most lasting contribution. His work was important in that it gave rise to research in new directions and advanced the study of social and cultic institutions in the biblical period.

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in developing a literary approach to the Bible, which emphasizes the total composition of the text and its artistic unity, rather than its fragmentation and dissection by conventional criticism. The sentiment common to the proponents of this approach is that the "scissors and paste" method of scholarship has been exhausted to its full extent, and that its achievements, however important, are limited in scope, because scholars tended to ignore the relationship between the parts and the whole and did not view the text in its final form as a cohesive structure. This relatively recent trend has produced many penetrating studies in biblical poetics, especially of narrative technique and parallelism in biblical poetry.

The early generation of biblical scholars created their reconstructions of Israel's past without any external knowledge of its contemporary cultural environment, aside from what could be learned from the Bible itself. This contextual void was often compensated for by speculation and theorizing. The archeological discoveries of the 19th and 20th centuries corrected this state of affairs. In the Land of Israel, excavations at important biblical sites such as Hazor, Megiddo, Samaria, Jerusalem, and Lachish have revealed the architecture of royal buildings, common dwellings, fortifications, sanctuaries and altars, water supplies, food utensils, weaponry, agricultural tools, and cultic objects to help paint a picture of Israelite society and of the Canaanites who preceded them. Only a few written documents from Israel have been found, probably because the materials commonly used for writing were perishable. However, in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Anatolia, beyond the remains of material culture, a wealth of textual information, stored in ancient libraries or inscribed on monuments, has survived. These texts bring to light the history, languages, and literatures of the surrounding peoples of the Ancient Near East. The recovery of these ancient languages has made an immense contribution to comparative Semitic lexicography and has vastly enriched understanding of biblical Hebrew.

Within a short time it became clear that all of the literary forms and genres present in ancient Israel had their parallels in the neighboring cultures, not surprisingly since Israel emerged as a nation long after the civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia had reached their peak. It is hard to say whether this is due to a substratum of culture that once dominated the whole region, or to subtle processes of cultural borrowing in both directions over the centuries.

A few examples will serve to demonstrate these parallels. More than six legal collections have been discovered in the cuneiform script, many of which show striking similarities with biblical law. The law dealing with the "goring ox" (Ex. 21:28-32) as a classic case of damages is such an example by way of content. As to structure and style, it was soon noted that the celebrated legal collection of Hammurabi has an historical prologue and ends with admonitions in much the same way as some of the biblical collections of law. The uniqueness of biblical law is that it is derived entirely from the Deity, and does not differentiate between secular and cultic law, but rather comprehends them both in one sphere. The discovery of ancient Canaanite epic literature in the city of Ugarit in northern Syria has shown that biblical poetry inherited much of its language, imagery, structure, and motifs from the Canaanites. Biblical psalmody has many parallels in Egyptian and Mesopotamian hymnology and prayer. The central concept in biblical religion of the covenant between Israel and God has been illuminated by comparisons with the form and contents of Near Eastern treaties. It seems that the affirmation of loyalty between political entities was adapted in Israel (most typically in the Book of Deuteronomy) to the religious sphere between God and man. One of the most dramatic parallels between biblical and Mesopotamian literature is in the literary traditions about CREATION and especially the FLOOD Story (preserved in its most elaborate form in the Epic of Gilgamesh). Despite the similarities in plot and language, the biblical story is markedly different in its moral and didactic viewpoint. Equally illuminating as the quest for parallels is the fact that the Bible does not contain any literature dealing with magic, divination, and astrology, so abundant in the other traditions. This is a clear indication that biblical religion did not tolerate certain pagan forms of communication with the supernatural sphere. In all the examples cited, the importance of drawing the parallels is in discerning the subtle differences and in highlighting the individual character of each tradition. Then it can be observed how certain elements deviate from the common pattern or were transformed by the monotheistic outlook, giving them a particular Israelite quality.

In Judaism From the period of the Exodus until Second Temple times, the Bible's impact on ancient Israel could mainly be seen in adherence to the Pentateuchal commandments. Thereafter, with the development of a religious "chain of tradition," Jewish life was increasingly dominated by an ORAL LAW that supplemented and vitalized the WRITTEN LAW. Out of rabbinic exposition of the Scriptures two literary currents emerged: the first, rooted in the Pentateuch, laid the foundations of Judaism's religio-legal "way of life," the HALAKHAH, based on 613 commandments (mitsvot); the second, homiletical and imaginative, gave rise to the AGGADAH and MIDRASH, extending from the weekly Pentateuchal and prophetical readings in the SYNAGOGUE to many other sections of the Bible as well. Rabbinic law prescribed how the Sabbath and festivals were to be observed, establishing rules that governed every aspect of daily life from the cradle to the grave, each mitsvah being ultimately traceable to the Pentateuch. Midrashic literature, which looked beyond the "plain" literal meaning of a biblical text, provided much of the impetus for Jewish exegesis and created a vast treasure of legend, anecdote, and folklore, also fostering a Jewish mystical tradition, the KABBALAH.

It was during the Hellenistic era that an attempt was first made to combine biblical and advanced secular (Greek) culture. The most important outcome of that short-lived trend was the Septuagint, through which Torah became familiar to Gentiles as the "Law" (Nomos), or Pentateuch. Hellenistic Judaism likewise gave birth to the first epic poetry and drama on biblical themes.

A concentration of biblical influences is visible in the synagogue, in its traditional design and mode of worship. Following the Temple's destruction in 70 CE, each Jewish house of prayer became a mikdash me'at ("Sanctuary in miniature"). Each daily service replaced one of the daily sacrifices. The ARK containing SCROLLS OF THE LAW (manuscripts of the Pentateuch) replaced the ancient Ark of the Covenant; the PAROKHET ("curtain") hung in front of the Ark, a replica of the TABLETS OF THE COVENANT inscribed with the TEN COMMANDMENTS, the ETERNAL LIGHT, and various forms of candelabra substituting for the MENORAH are other notable reminders of the lost Temple.

Elaborately inscribed biblical verses often formed part of the synagogue's interior design in medieval Spain; nowadays, an appropriate verse may be engraved over the Ark or may embellish the exterior. Hebrew, the language of the Bible, is also the traditional language of prayer. From early rabbinic times, the LITURGY comprised various PSALMS, the SHEMA, other Scriptural passages, the AMIDAH prayer which contains many biblical echoes, benedictions such as the PRIESTLY BLESSING, and the READING OF THE LAW on Mondays and Thursdays, Sabbaths, the New Moon, and all festivals as well as fast days. The HALLEL psalms are recited on pilgrim festivals and the AVODAH, the high priest's Temple ritual, on the day of atonement. The rabbi's sermon is usually based on that particular day's Pentateuchal or prophetical reading. The Jew is reminded of the Bible every time he sees the MEZUZAH on his doorpost.

Jewish EDUCATION proceeded from the child's mastery of Hebrew to study of the weekly Torah portion (parashah) and then to MISHNAH, TALMUD, and the essentials of Jewish law. Prime Jewish interest in and study of the Bible was concentrated on the Pentateuch, seen as the direct word of God, whereas the rest of the Bible, while often directly Divinely inspired (as in the words of the prophets), did not have the same authority. Although conflicting points of view were expressed in regard to dogma, MAIMONIDES defined 13 PRINCIPLES OF FAITH, which in time gained almost universal acceptance. They included the belief "that all the words of the prophets are true," that Moses remains the supreme prophet, that the Torah which he received is the one preserved by Jews, and that it will never be replaced by any other revelation. While Midrashic literature helped Jews to see the partriarchs, prophets, and other biblical figures as real flesh-and-blood people, an increasing emphasis on talmudic and halakhic study made both youngsters and adults inclined to view the Bible from the Talmud's perspective. It was partly in reaction to this trend that the KARAITES mounted their campaign against Judaism's domination by the Oral Law; and it was chiefly as a result of that conflict that Karaism's "Rabbanite" opponents acknowledged the need for an authentic literal approach to Scripture and for an authoritative exposition of the entire Hebrew Bible. This change of emphasis had two vastly important effects: it promoted the development of rabbinic exegesis spearheaded by RASHI and later medieval commentators (see BIBLE COMMENTARY, JEWISH), and it fostered a biblical Hebrew revival under JUDAH HALEVI and other poets of the Spanish Golden Age.

Except in Italy, where Jewish scholarship and Hebrew culture benefited from the Renaissance, an enforced ghetto existence adversely affected Bible study among Jews from the early 16th until the late 18th century, attention being concentrated on the Talmud and Kabbalah. A change occurred with the emergence of the Jewish Enlightenment (HASKALAH) in Europe, and Moses MENDELSSOHN's Biur, which enabled German Jews to acquire secular knowledge through reading the Bible in German. This, in turn, led to a jettisoning of the halakhah and talmudic discipline by REFORM JUDAISM, which proclaimed its return to biblical inspiration, especially stressing the morality of the prophets; to the Hebrew revival in Eastern Europe; and to an upsurge of Jewish nationalism, in which Hebrew and a new secular approach to the Bible played a vital role.

Whereas Ashkenazi Jews largely neglected Bible study from the Middle Ages down to the 19th century (and, among the ultra-Orthodox, down to modern times), a different attitude prevailed in the Sephardi-Oriental Jewish world. There, a comprehensive knowledge of the Scriptures was taught, enabling the average Sephardi Jew to quote long biblical passages from memory. Such loving familiarity with the Hebrew Bible remains typical of the North African and Middle Eastern Jewish communities down to the present.

Modern Jewish education, reinforced by translations and commentaries in the vernacular, has stressed the Bible as a basis of Jewish study. In modern Israel, Bible study is integral to every child's schooling, although different approaches are adopted by the religious and non-religious educational systems. With Hebrew being the national language of Israel, the Bible is an open book to Israelis. Archeology sheds new light on the biblical past, children and new villages or neighborhoods are often given biblical names, an unending stream of books and articles roll off the press, talks on the weekly portion are broadcast each morning, and Bible contests are a popular pastime.

---

For a list of words related to Hebrew Bible, see:

• Sacred Texts and Objects - Hebrew Bible: Old Testament: Torah, Prophets, and Hagiographa

---

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)