Masoretic Text - Revision history

Nick at 11:37, 15 February 2025

2025-02-15T11:37:39Z

Beza 1598 at 08:05, 5 March 2016

2016-03-05T08:05:00Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:05, 5 March 2016
Line 157:		Line 157:
	*[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=246&letter=M ''Jewish Encyclopedia'':] Masorah		*[http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=246&letter=M ''Jewish Encyclopedia'':] Masorah
	*[http://www.seforimonline.org/seforim3.html Dr. Christian David Ginsburg's 1880 edition of the Massorah] (PDF)		*[http://www.seforimonline.org/seforim3.html Dr. Christian David Ginsburg's 1880 edition of the Massorah] (PDF)

			{{Donate}}

Nick at 12:55, 25 September 2011

2011-09-25T12:55:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:55, 25 September 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[Catholic Bible Translations\|Catholic Bibles]].		The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[Catholic Bible Translations\|Catholic Bibles]].

	The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the ~~Christian~~ New Testament.		The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (commonly said to have been made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC, but this is disputed, see [[LXX]]) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is mistakenly thought to be often quoted in the [[New Testament]].

	The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.		The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.

	The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<sup>[]</sup> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.		The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<sup>[]</sup> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.

	== Origin and transmission ==		== Origin and transmission ==

	The [[Talmud]] (and also [[Karaite]] mss.) states that a standard copy of the Hebrew Bible was kept in the court of the [[Temple in Jerusalem]] for the benefit of copyists; there were paid correctors of Biblical books among the officers of the Temple (Talmud, tractate Ketubot 106a). This copy is mentioned in the [[Pseudo-Aristeas\|Aristeas Letter]] (§ 30; comp. Blau, ''Studien zum Althebr. Buchwesen,'' p. 100); in the statements of [[Philo]] (preamble to his "Analysis of the Political Constitution of the Jews") and in [[Josephus]] (''Contra Ap.'' i. 8).		The [[Talmud]] (and also [[Karaite]] mss.) states that a standard copy of the Hebrew Bible was kept in the court of the [[Temple in Jerusalem]] for the benefit of copyists; there were paid correctors of Biblical books among the officers of the Temple (Talmud, tractate Ketubot 106a). This copy is mentioned in the [[Pseudo-Aristeas\|Aristeas Letter]] (§ 30; comp. Blau, ''Studien zum Althebr. Buchwesen,'' p. 100); in the statements of [[Philo]] (preamble to his "Analysis of the Political Constitution of the Jews") and in [[Josephus]] (''Contra Ap.'' i. 8).

Nick at 15:18, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:18:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 26 January 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[Catholic Bible Translations		The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[Catholic Bible Translations\|Catholic Bibles]].
	\|Catholic Bibles]].

	The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.		The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.

Nick at 15:17, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:17:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 26 January 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[~~Roman~~ Catholic\|Catholic]] ~~Bibles~~.		The '''Masoretic Text''' ('''MT''') is the [[Hebrew language\|Hebrew]] text of the Jewish Bible ([[Tanakh]]). It defines not just the [[Development of the Jewish Bible canon\|books of the Jewish canon]], but also the precise letter-text of the biblical books in [[Judaism]], as well as their [[niqqud\|vocalization]] and [[cantillation\|accentuation]] for both public reading and private study. The MT is also widely used as the basis for translations of the [[Old Testament]] in Protestant [[Bible]]s, and in recent decades also for [[Catholic Bible Translations
			\|Catholic Bibles]].

	The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.		The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.

Nick at 15:17, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:17:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:17, 26 January 2011
Line 3:		Line 3:
	The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.		The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the [[Masoretes]] between the seventh and tenth centuries AD. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early second century (and also differ little from some [[Qumran]] texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the [[Septuagint]], a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BC) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Palestine and that is often quoted in the Christian New Testament.

	The Hebrew word mesorah(מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.		The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.

	The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<sup>[]</sup> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.		The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<sup>[]</sup> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.

Nick at 15:16, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:16:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 26 January 2011
Line 31:		Line 31:

	=== The Middle Ages ===		=== The Middle Ages ===
	The two rival authorities, Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, practically brought the Masorah to a close. Very few additions were made by the later Masoretes, styled in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Naḳdanim, who revised the works of the copyists, added the vowels and accents (generally in fainter ink and with a finer pen) and frequently the Masorah. Many believe that the Ben Asher family were [[Karaites]]~~{{Fact\|date=August 2008}}~~.		The two rival authorities, Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali, practically brought the Masorah to a close. Very few additions were made by the later Masoretes, styled in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Naḳdanim, who revised the works of the copyists, added the vowels and accents (generally in fainter ink and with a finer pen) and frequently the Masorah. Many believe that the Ben Asher family were [[Karaites]].

	Considerable influence on the development and spread of Masoretic literature was exercised during the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries by the Franco-German school of Tosafists. R. Gershom, his brother Machir, [[Joseph ben Samuel Bonfils]] (Tob 'Elem) of Limoges, R. Tam ([[Jacob ben Meïr]]), [[Menahem ben Perez]] of Joigny, [[Perez ben Elijah]] of Corbeil, [[Judah of Paris]], [[Meïr Spira]], and R. [[Meïr of Rothenburg]] made Masoretic compilations, or additions to the subject, which are all more or less frequently referred to in the marginal glosses of Biblical codices and in the works of Hebrew grammarians.		Considerable influence on the development and spread of Masoretic literature was exercised during the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries by the Franco-German school of Tosafists. R. Gershom, his brother Machir, [[Joseph ben Samuel Bonfils]] (Tob 'Elem) of Limoges, R. Tam ([[Jacob ben Meïr]]), [[Menahem ben Perez]] of Joigny, [[Perez ben Elijah]] of Corbeil, [[Judah of Paris]], [[Meïr Spira]], and R. [[Meïr of Rothenburg]] made Masoretic compilations, or additions to the subject, which are all more or less frequently referred to in the marginal glosses of Biblical codices and in the works of Hebrew grammarians.
Line 50:		Line 50:

	=== Numerical Masorah ===		=== Numerical Masorah ===
	~~{{BibleRelated}}~~
	In classical antiquity, [[copyist]]s were paid for their work according to the number of [[stich]]s (lines of verse). As the prose books of the Bible were hardly ever written in stichs, the copyists, in order to estimate the amount of work, had to count the letters. For the Masoretic Text, such statistical information more importantly also ensured accuracy in the transmission of the text with the production of subsequent copies that were done by hand.		In classical antiquity, [[copyist]]s were paid for their work according to the number of [[stich]]s (lines of verse). As the prose books of the Bible were hardly ever written in stichs, the copyists, in order to estimate the amount of work, had to count the letters. For the Masoretic Text, such statistical information more importantly also ensured accuracy in the transmission of the text with the production of subsequent copies that were done by hand.

Nick: Protected "Masoretic Text" [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]

2011-01-26T15:16:22Z

Protected "Masoretic Text" [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed]

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:16, 26 January 2011
(No difference)

Nick at 15:16, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:16:16Z

Nick at 15:15, 26 January 2011

2011-01-26T15:15:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:15, 26 January 2011
Line 5:		Line 5:
	The Hebrew word mesorah(מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.		The Hebrew word mesorah(מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.

	The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<~~ref~~>~~A seventh century fragment containing the Song of the Sea (Exodus 13:19-16:1) is one of the few surviving texts from the "silent era" of Hebrew biblical texts between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the~~ [~~[Aleppo Codex]]. See [http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178708654713&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull "Rare scroll fragment to be unveiled," Jerusalem Post, May 21, 2007~~].</~~ref~~> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.		The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,<sup>[]/sup> and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.
	== Origin and transmission ==		== Origin and transmission ==
	The [[Talmud]] (and also [[Karaite]] mss.) states that a standard copy of the Hebrew Bible was kept in the court of the [[Temple in Jerusalem]] for the benefit of copyists; there were paid correctors of Biblical books among the officers of the Temple (Talmud, tractate Ketubot 106a). This copy is mentioned in the [[Pseudo-Aristeas\|Aristeas Letter]] (§ 30; comp. Blau, ''Studien zum Althebr. Buchwesen,'' p. 100); in the statements of [[Philo]] (preamble to his "Analysis of the Political Constitution of the Jews") and in [[Josephus]] (''Contra Ap.'' i. 8).		The [[Talmud]] (and also [[Karaite]] mss.) states that a standard copy of the Hebrew Bible was kept in the court of the [[Temple in Jerusalem]] for the benefit of copyists; there were paid correctors of Biblical books among the officers of the Temple (Talmud, tractate Ketubot 106a). This copy is mentioned in the [[Pseudo-Aristeas\|Aristeas Letter]] (§ 30; comp. Blau, ''Studien zum Althebr. Buchwesen,'' p. 100); in the statements of [[Philo]] (preamble to his "Analysis of the Political Constitution of the Jews") and in [[Josephus]] (''Contra Ap.'' i. 8).
Line 13:		Line 13:
	=== Second Temple period ===		=== Second Temple period ===

	The discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] at [[Qumran]], dating from c.150 BC–AD 75, shows however that in this period there was not always the scrupulous uniformity of text that was so stressed in later centuries. The scrolls show numerous small variations in orthography, both as against the later Masoretic text, and between each other. It is also evident from the notings of corrections and of variant alternatives that scribes felt free to choose according to their personal taste and discretion between different readings.<~~ref name="Cohen1979"~~>~~Menachem Cohen,~~ [~~http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/CohenArt/ The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism~~] ~~in ''HaMikrah V'anachnu'', ed. Uriel Simon, HaMachon L'Yahadut U'Machshava Bat-Z'mananu and Dvir, Tel-Aviv, 1979<~~/~~ref~~> However, despite these variations, most of the Qumran fragments can be classified as being closer to the Masoretic text than to any other text group that has survived. According to Shiffman, 60% can be classed as being of proto-Masoretic type, and a further 20% Qumran style with bases in proto-Masoretic texts, compared to 5% proto-[[Samaritan Pentateuch\|Samaritan]] type, 5% [[Septuagint]]al type, and 10% non-aligned.<~~ref~~>~~Shiffman, ''Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls''<~~/~~ref~~> Furthermore, according to Haas, most of the texts which vary from the Masoretic type, including four of the Septuagint type manuscript fragments, were found in Cave 4. "This is the cave where the texts were not preserved carefully in jars. It is conjectured, that cave 4 was a [[geniza]] for the depositing of texts that were damaged or had textual errors." <~~ref~~>~~Gretchen Haas<~~/~~ref~~>		The discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] at [[Qumran]], dating from c.150 BC–AD 75, shows however that in this period there was not always the scrupulous uniformity of text that was so stressed in later centuries. The scrolls show numerous small variations in orthography, both as against the later Masoretic text, and between each other. It is also evident from the notings of corrections and of variant alternatives that scribes felt free to choose according to their personal taste and discretion between different readings.<sup>[]/sup> However, despite these variations, most of the Qumran fragments can be classified as being closer to the Masoretic text than to any other text group that has survived. According to Shiffman, 60% can be classed as being of proto-Masoretic type, and a further 20% Qumran style with bases in proto-Masoretic texts, compared to 5% proto-[[Samaritan Pentateuch\|Samaritan]] type, 5% [[Septuagint]]al type, and 10% non-aligned.<sup>[]/sup> Furthermore, according to Haas, most of the texts which vary from the Masoretic type, including four of the Septuagint type manuscript fragments, were found in Cave 4. "This is the cave where the texts were not preserved carefully in jars. It is conjectured, that cave 4 was a [[geniza]] for the depositing of texts that were damaged or had textual errors." <sup>[]/sup>

	=== Rabbinic period ===		=== Rabbinic period ===

	An emphasis on minute details of words and spellings, already used among the [[Pharisees]] as bases for argumentation, reached its height with the example of Rabbi [[Akiva]] (d. AD 135). The idea of a perfect text sanctified in its consonantal base quickly spread throughout the Jewish communities via supportive statements in [[Halakha]], [[Aggada]], and Jewish thought;<~~ref name="Cohen1979"~~ /> and with it increasingly forceful strictures leading ultimately to the statement in medieval times that a deviation in even a single letter would make a Torah scroll invalid.<~~ref~~>[~~[Rambam~~]~~], The Laws of Tefillin, Mezuzot, and Torah Scrolls, 1:2<~~/~~ref~~> Very few manuscripts are said to have survived the destruction of Jerusalem in [[70 AD\|AD 70]].<~~ref~~>[~~[Sir Godfrey Driver~~]~~], [http:~~/~~/www.bible-researcher.com/driver1.html Introduction to the Old Testament of the New English Bible], 1970</ref~~> This both drastically reduced the number of variants in circulation, and gave a new urgency that the text must be preserved. New Greek translations were also made. Unlike the Septuagint, large-scale deviations in sense between the Greek of [[Aquila of Sinope\|Aquila]] and [[Theodotion]] and what we now know as the Masoretic text are minimal. Detailed variations between different Hebrew texts in use still clearly existed though, as witnessed by differences between the present-day Masoretic text and versions mentioned in the [[Gemara]], and often even Halachic [[midrash]]im based on spelling versions which do not exist in the current Masoretic text.<~~ref name="Cohen1979"~~ /> (Mostly, however, these variations are limited to whether particular words should be written [[plene]] or defectively - i.e. whether a [[mater lectionis]] consonant to represent a particular vowel sound should or should not be included in a particular word at a particular point).		An emphasis on minute details of words and spellings, already used among the [[Pharisees]] as bases for argumentation, reached its height with the example of Rabbi [[Akiva]] (d. AD 135). The idea of a perfect text sanctified in its consonantal base quickly spread throughout the Jewish communities via supportive statements in [[Halakha]], [[Aggada]], and Jewish thought;<sup>[]/sup> and with it increasingly forceful strictures leading ultimately to the statement in medieval times that a deviation in even a single letter would make a Torah scroll invalid.<sup>[]/sup> Very few manuscripts are said to have survived the destruction of Jerusalem in [[70 AD\|AD 70]].<sup>[]/sup> This both drastically reduced the number of variants in circulation, and gave a new urgency that the text must be preserved. New Greek translations were also made. Unlike the Septuagint, large-scale deviations in sense between the Greek of [[Aquila of Sinope\|Aquila]] and [[Theodotion]] and what we now know as the Masoretic text are minimal. Detailed variations between different Hebrew texts in use still clearly existed though, as witnessed by differences between the present-day Masoretic text and versions mentioned in the [[Gemara]], and often even Halachic [[midrash]]im based on spelling versions which do not exist in the current Masoretic text.<sup>[]/sup> (Mostly, however, these variations are limited to whether particular words should be written [[plene]] or defectively - i.e. whether a [[mater lectionis]] consonant to represent a particular vowel sound should or should not be included in a particular word at a particular point).

	=== The Age of the Masoretes ===		=== The Age of the Masoretes ===

	The current received text finally achieved predominance through the reputation of the [[Masoretes]], schools of scribes and Torah scholars working between the 7th and 11th centuries, based primarily in [[Palestine]] in the cities of [[Tiberias]] and [[Jerusalem]], and in [[Babylonia]]. These schools developed such prestige for the accuracy and error-control of their copying techniques that their texts established an authority beyond all others.<~~ref name="Cohen1979"~~ /> Differences remained, sometimes bolstered by systematic local differences in pronunciation and [[cantillation]]. Every locality, following the tradition of its school, had a standard codex embodying its readings. In Babylonia the school of [[Sura (city)\|Sura]] differed from that of [[Nehardea]]; and similar differences existed in the schools of the Land of Israel as against that at Tiberias, which in later times increasingly became the chief seat of learning. In this period living tradition ceased, and the Masoretes in preparing their codices usually followed the one school or the other, examining, however, standard codices of other schools and noting their differences.		The current received text finally achieved predominance through the reputation of the [[Masoretes]], schools of scribes and Torah scholars working between the 7th and 11th centuries, based primarily in [[Palestine]] in the cities of [[Tiberias]] and [[Jerusalem]], and in [[Babylonia]]. These schools developed such prestige for the accuracy and error-control of their copying techniques that their texts established an authority beyond all others.<sup>[]/sup> Differences remained, sometimes bolstered by systematic local differences in pronunciation and [[cantillation]]. Every locality, following the tradition of its school, had a standard codex embodying its readings. In Babylonia the school of [[Sura (city)\|Sura]] differed from that of [[Nehardea]]; and similar differences existed in the schools of the Land of Israel as against that at Tiberias, which in later times increasingly became the chief seat of learning. In this period living tradition ceased, and the Masoretes in preparing their codices usually followed the one school or the other, examining, however, standard codices of other schools and noting their differences.

	==== Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali ====		==== Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali ====
Line 116:		Line 116:

	The [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] have shed new light on the history of the Masoretic Text. Many texts found there, especially those from [[Masada]], are quite similar to the Masoretic Text, suggesting that an ancestor of the Masoretic Text was indeed extant as early as the 2nd century BC. However, other texts, including many of those from [[Qumran]], differ substantially, indicating that the Masoretic Text was but one of a diverse set of Biblical writings (Lane Fox 1991:99-106; Tov 1992:115).		The [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] have shed new light on the history of the Masoretic Text. Many texts found there, especially those from [[Masada]], are quite similar to the Masoretic Text, suggesting that an ancestor of the Masoretic Text was indeed extant as early as the 2nd century BC. However, other texts, including many of those from [[Qumran]], differ substantially, indicating that the Masoretic Text was but one of a diverse set of Biblical writings (Lane Fox 1991:99-106; Tov 1992:115).
	§Among the rejected books by both the Judaic and Catholic canons was found the Book of Enoch, the Manual of Discipline or "Rule of the Community" (1QS) and the "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness." (1QM).<~~ref~~>~~Mansoor, Menahem. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids, Michigan and Driver, G. R., The Judaean Scrolls. Great Britain: Oxford, 1965.<~~/~~ref~~>		§Among the rejected books by both the Judaic and Catholic canons was found the Book of Enoch, the Manual of Discipline or "Rule of the Community" (1QS) and the "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness." (1QM).<sup>[]/sup>

	==Some important editions==		==Some important editions==
	There have been very many published editions of the Masoretic text; this is a list of some of the most important.		There have been very many published editions of the Masoretic text; this is a list of some of the most important.
	*[[Daniel Bomberg]], ed. [[Jacob ben Hayyim ibn Adonijah]], 1524-1525, [[Venice]]		*[[Daniel Bomberg]], ed. [[Jacob ben Hayyim ibn Adonijah]], 1524-1525, [[Venice]]
	:The second [[Mikraot Gedolot\|Rabbinic Bible]], which served as the base for all future editions. This was the source text used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611 and the [[New King James Version]] in 1982.<~~ref name=price~~>~~{{cite web~~		:The second [[Mikraot Gedolot\|Rabbinic Bible]], which served as the base for all future editions. This was the source text used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611 and the [[New King James Version]] in 1982.<sup>[]/sup>
	~~\| author = Price, James D.~~
	~~\| title = This file is a letter I wrote to Mrs. Ripplinger in 1994 in response to her book, New Age Bible Versions. It deals primarily with her criticism of the New King James Version.~~
	~~\| publisher = ''James D. Price Publications''~~
	~~\| date = 1994-02-14~~
	~~\| url = http:~~/~~/www.jamesdprice.com/images/Ripplinger_February_15,_1994.doc~~
	~~\| format = MS Word~~
	~~\| accessdate = 2009-03-18~~
	\| quote = But regardless of these details, as former executive editor of the NKJV Old Testament, I can confidently assure you that the NKJV followed, as carefully as possible, the Bobmerg 1524-25 Ben Chayyim edition that the KJV 1611 translators used--I personally made sure. }}</ref>
	*[[Everard van der Hooght]], 1705, [[Amsterdam]]		*[[Everard van der Hooght]], 1705, [[Amsterdam]]
	:Nearly all 18th century and 19th century Bibles were almost exact reprints of this edition.		:Nearly all 18th century and 19th century Bibles were almost exact reprints of this edition.
Line 138:		Line 130:
	*[[Seligman Baer]] and [[Franz Delitzsch]], 1869–1895 ([[Exodus]] to [[Deuteronomy]] never appeared)		*[[Seligman Baer]] and [[Franz Delitzsch]], 1869–1895 ([[Exodus]] to [[Deuteronomy]] never appeared)
	*[[Christian David Ginsburg]], 1894; 2nd edition, 1908–1926		*[[Christian David Ginsburg]], 1894; 2nd edition, 1908–1926
	:The first edition was very close to the second Bomberg edition, but with variants added from a number of manuscripts and all of the earliest printed editions, collated with far more care than the work of Kennicott; he did all the work himself. The second edition diverged slightly more from Bomberg, and collated more manuscripts; he did most of the work himself, but failing health forced him to rely partly on his wife and other assistants.<~~ref~~>~~"Introduction to the Ginsburg Edition of the Hebrew Old Testament",~~ [~~[British and Foreign Bible Society]~~]~~, 1928.<~~/~~ref~~>		:The first edition was very close to the second Bomberg edition, but with variants added from a number of manuscripts and all of the earliest printed editions, collated with far more care than the work of Kennicott; he did all the work himself. The second edition diverged slightly more from Bomberg, and collated more manuscripts; he did most of the work himself, but failing health forced him to rely partly on his wife and other assistants.<sup>[]/sup>
	*[[Biblia Hebraica]], first two editions, 1906, 1912; virtually identical to the second Bomberg edition but with variants from Hebrew sources and early translations in the footnotes		*[[Biblia Hebraica]], first two editions, 1906, 1912; virtually identical to the second Bomberg edition but with variants from Hebrew sources and early translations in the footnotes
	*[[Biblia Hebraica]], third edition based on the [[Leningrad Codex]], 1937		*[[Biblia Hebraica]], third edition based on the [[Leningrad Codex]], 1937

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:37, 15 February 2025
Line 5:		Line 5:
	The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.		The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see [[Oral law#Oral law in Judaism\|Oral law]]), but in reference to the '''masoretic text''' the word ''mesorah'' has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the [[Hebrew Bible]] which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.

	The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD,~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.		The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the ninth century AD, and the [[Aleppo Codex]] (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its [[Torah]] section) dates from the tenth century.

	== Origin and transmission ==		== Origin and transmission ==
Line 15:		Line 15:
	=== Second Temple period ===		=== Second Temple period ===

	The discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] at [[Qumran]], dating from c.150 BC–AD 75, shows however that in this period there was not always the scrupulous uniformity of text that was so stressed in later centuries. The scrolls show numerous small variations in orthography, both as against the later Masoretic text, and between each other. It is also evident from the notings of corrections and of variant alternatives that scribes felt free to choose according to their personal taste and discretion between different readings.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ However, despite these variations, most of the Qumran fragments can be classified as being closer to the Masoretic text than to any other text group that has survived. According to Shiffman, 60% can be classed as being of proto-Masoretic type, and a further 20% Qumran style with bases in proto-Masoretic texts, compared to 5% proto-[[Samaritan Pentateuch\|Samaritan]] type, 5% [[Septuagint]]al type, and 10% non-aligned.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ Furthermore, according to Haas, most of the texts which vary from the Masoretic type, including four of the Septuagint type manuscript fragments, were found in Cave 4. "This is the cave where the texts were not preserved carefully in jars. It is conjectured, that cave 4 was a [[geniza]] for the depositing of texts that were damaged or had textual errors." ~~<sup>[]</sup>~~		The discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] at [[Qumran]], dating from c.150 BC–AD 75, shows however that in this period there was not always the scrupulous uniformity of text that was so stressed in later centuries. The scrolls show numerous small variations in orthography, both as against the later Masoretic text, and between each other. It is also evident from the notings of corrections and of variant alternatives that scribes felt free to choose according to their personal taste and discretion between different readings. However, despite these variations, most of the Qumran fragments can be classified as being closer to the Masoretic text than to any other text group that has survived. According to Shiffman, 60% can be classed as being of proto-Masoretic type, and a further 20% Qumran style with bases in proto-Masoretic texts, compared to 5% proto-[[Samaritan Pentateuch\|Samaritan]] type, 5% [[Septuagint]]al type, and 10% non-aligned. Furthermore, according to Haas, most of the texts which vary from the Masoretic type, including four of the Septuagint type manuscript fragments, were found in Cave 4. "This is the cave where the texts were not preserved carefully in jars. It is conjectured, that cave 4 was a [[geniza]] for the depositing of texts that were damaged or had textual errors."

	=== Rabbinic period ===		=== Rabbinic period ===

	An emphasis on minute details of words and spellings, already used among the [[Pharisees]] as bases for argumentation, reached its height with the example of Rabbi [[Akiva]] (d. AD 135). The idea of a perfect text sanctified in its consonantal base quickly spread throughout the Jewish communities via supportive statements in [[Halakha]], [[Aggada]], and Jewish thought;~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ and with it increasingly forceful strictures leading ultimately to the statement in medieval times that a deviation in even a single letter would make a Torah scroll invalid.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ Very few manuscripts are said to have survived the destruction of Jerusalem in [[70 AD\|AD 70]].~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ This both drastically reduced the number of variants in circulation, and gave a new urgency that the text must be preserved. New Greek translations were also made. Unlike the Septuagint, large-scale deviations in sense between the Greek of [[Aquila of Sinope\|Aquila]] and [[Theodotion]] and what we now know as the Masoretic text are minimal. Detailed variations between different Hebrew texts in use still clearly existed though, as witnessed by differences between the present-day Masoretic text and versions mentioned in the [[Gemara]], and often even Halachic [[midrash]]im based on spelling versions which do not exist in the current Masoretic text.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ (Mostly, however, these variations are limited to whether particular words should be written [[plene]] or defectively - i.e. whether a [[mater lectionis]] consonant to represent a particular vowel sound should or should not be included in a particular word at a particular point).		An emphasis on minute details of words and spellings, already used among the [[Pharisees]] as bases for argumentation, reached its height with the example of Rabbi [[Akiva]] (d. AD 135). The idea of a perfect text sanctified in its consonantal base quickly spread throughout the Jewish communities via supportive statements in [[Halakha]], [[Aggada]], and Jewish thought; and with it increasingly forceful strictures leading ultimately to the statement in medieval times that a deviation in even a single letter would make a Torah scroll invalid. Very few manuscripts are said to have survived the destruction of Jerusalem in [[70 AD\|AD 70]]. This both drastically reduced the number of variants in circulation, and gave a new urgency that the text must be preserved. New Greek translations were also made. Unlike the Septuagint, large-scale deviations in sense between the Greek of [[Aquila of Sinope\|Aquila]] and [[Theodotion]] and what we now know as the Masoretic text are minimal. Detailed variations between different Hebrew texts in use still clearly existed though, as witnessed by differences between the present-day Masoretic text and versions mentioned in the [[Gemara]], and often even Halachic [[midrash]]im based on spelling versions which do not exist in the current Masoretic text. (Mostly, however, these variations are limited to whether particular words should be written [[plene]] or defectively - i.e. whether a [[mater lectionis]] consonant to represent a particular vowel sound should or should not be included in a particular word at a particular point).

	=== The Age of the Masoretes ===		=== The Age of the Masoretes ===

	The current received text finally achieved predominance through the reputation of the [[Masoretes]], schools of scribes and Torah scholars working between the 7th and 11th centuries, based primarily in [[Palestine]] in the cities of [[Tiberias]] and [[Jerusalem]], and in [[Babylonia]]. These schools developed such prestige for the accuracy and error-control of their copying techniques that their texts established an authority beyond all others.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~ Differences remained, sometimes bolstered by systematic local differences in pronunciation and [[cantillation]]. Every locality, following the tradition of its school, had a standard codex embodying its readings. In Babylonia the school of [[Sura (city)\|Sura]] differed from that of [[Nehardea]]; and similar differences existed in the schools of the Land of Israel as against that at Tiberias, which in later times increasingly became the chief seat of learning. In this period living tradition ceased, and the Masoretes in preparing their codices usually followed the one school or the other, examining, however, standard codices of other schools and noting their differences.		The current received text finally achieved predominance through the reputation of the [[Masoretes]], schools of scribes and Torah scholars working between the 7th and 11th centuries, based primarily in [[Palestine]] in the cities of [[Tiberias]] and [[Jerusalem]], and in [[Babylonia]]. These schools developed such prestige for the accuracy and error-control of their copying techniques that their texts established an authority beyond all others. Differences remained, sometimes bolstered by systematic local differences in pronunciation and [[cantillation]]. Every locality, following the tradition of its school, had a standard codex embodying its readings. In Babylonia the school of [[Sura (city)\|Sura]] differed from that of [[Nehardea]]; and similar differences existed in the schools of the Land of Israel as against that at Tiberias, which in later times increasingly became the chief seat of learning. In this period living tradition ceased, and the Masoretes in preparing their codices usually followed the one school or the other, examining, however, standard codices of other schools and noting their differences.

	==== Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali ====		==== Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali ====
Line 117:		Line 117:

	The [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] have shed new light on the history of the Masoretic Text. Many texts found there, especially those from [[Masada]], are quite similar to the Masoretic Text, suggesting that an ancestor of the Masoretic Text was indeed extant as early as the 2nd century BC. However, other texts, including many of those from [[Qumran]], differ substantially, indicating that the Masoretic Text was but one of a diverse set of Biblical writings (Lane Fox 1991:99-106; Tov 1992:115).		The [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] have shed new light on the history of the Masoretic Text. Many texts found there, especially those from [[Masada]], are quite similar to the Masoretic Text, suggesting that an ancestor of the Masoretic Text was indeed extant as early as the 2nd century BC. However, other texts, including many of those from [[Qumran]], differ substantially, indicating that the Masoretic Text was but one of a diverse set of Biblical writings (Lane Fox 1991:99-106; Tov 1992:115).
	§Among the rejected books by both the Judaic and Catholic canons was found the Book of Enoch, the Manual of Discipline or "Rule of the Community" (1QS) and the "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness." (1QM).~~<sup>[]</sup>~~		§Among the rejected books by both the Judaic and Catholic canons was found the Book of Enoch, the Manual of Discipline or "Rule of the Community" (1QS) and the "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness." (1QM).

	==Some important editions==		==Some important editions==
	There have been very many published editions of the Masoretic text; this is a list of some of the most important.		There have been very many published editions of the Masoretic text; this is a list of some of the most important.
	*[[Daniel Bomberg]], ed. [[Jacob ben Hayyim ibn Adonijah]], 1524-1525, [[Venice]]		*[[Daniel Bomberg]], ed. [[Jacob ben Hayyim ibn Adonijah]], 1524-1525, [[Venice]]
	:The second [[Mikraot Gedolot\|Rabbinic Bible]], which served as the base for all future editions. This was the source text used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611 and the [[New King James Version]] in 1982.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~		:The second [[Mikraot Gedolot\|Rabbinic Bible]], which served as the base for all future editions. This was the source text used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611 and the [[New King James Version]] in 1982.
	*[[Everard van der Hooght]], 1705, [[Amsterdam]]		*[[Everard van der Hooght]], 1705, [[Amsterdam]]
	:Nearly all 18th century and 19th century Bibles were almost exact reprints of this edition.		:Nearly all 18th century and 19th century Bibles were almost exact reprints of this edition.
Line 131:		Line 131:
	*[[Seligman Baer]] and [[Franz Delitzsch]], 1869–1895 ([[Exodus]] to [[Deuteronomy]] never appeared)		*[[Seligman Baer]] and [[Franz Delitzsch]], 1869–1895 ([[Exodus]] to [[Deuteronomy]] never appeared)
	*[[Christian David Ginsburg]], 1894; 2nd edition, 1908–1926		*[[Christian David Ginsburg]], 1894; 2nd edition, 1908–1926
	:The first edition was very close to the second Bomberg edition, but with variants added from a number of manuscripts and all of the earliest printed editions, collated with far more care than the work of Kennicott; he did all the work himself. The second edition diverged slightly more from Bomberg, and collated more manuscripts; he did most of the work himself, but failing health forced him to rely partly on his wife and other assistants.~~<sup>[]</sup>~~		:The first edition was very close to the second Bomberg edition, but with variants added from a number of manuscripts and all of the earliest printed editions, collated with far more care than the work of Kennicott; he did all the work himself. The second edition diverged slightly more from Bomberg, and collated more manuscripts; he did most of the work himself, but failing health forced him to rely partly on his wife and other assistants.
	*[[Biblia Hebraica]], first two editions, 1906, 1912; virtually identical to the second Bomberg edition but with variants from Hebrew sources and early translations in the footnotes		*[[Biblia Hebraica]], first two editions, 1906, 1912; virtually identical to the second Bomberg edition but with variants from Hebrew sources and early translations in the footnotes
	*[[Biblia Hebraica]], third edition based on the [[Leningrad Codex]], 1937		*[[Biblia Hebraica]], third edition based on the [[Leningrad Codex]], 1937