Biblical Hebrew Forum

["rpunkboy AT netzero.com" <rpunkboy AT netzero.com>]

Here, is my analysis of Lev. 18.22; 20.13. I would like to recieve any 
feedback or responses to it. It mainly depends on Jerome T. Walsh's assertion 
that Lev. 18.22 address the passive partner (2001). Would you agree or 
disagree? 

Typically, Leviticus 18.22 is translated by English bibles as “You are not to 
lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination,” with the 
phrase miškěbě iššâ being understood as a relative participle 
clause referring to the active penetrator, “as one lies with a woman.” 
However, as Jerome T. Walsh has rightly pointed out, miškěbě is a 
cognate of sâkav, “to lie,” thus, making it an internal/absolute object or 
schema/figura etymologica.  The cognate direct object construction “regularly 
describes an action performed by the subject, not the subject’s experience of 
someone else’s action”  So “Let the earth produce produce (i.e. vegetation), 
“they feared a fear” (Ps. 14.5), “Jerusalem has sinned a sin” (Pr. 15.27), 
and “they have dreamed a dream” (Jo. 3.1) would confirm Walsh’s initial 
remarks. And miškěbě iššâ should be understood as having a genitive 
since it is in the construct-absolute state; thus, the cognate sâkav in 2 Sam 
4.5b reads wěhu΄ šōkhěv ě΄t miškav 
haṣṣharayim, “he was lying down the laying of noontime,” not 
“with” noontime. And Genesis 49.4 states: “you went up to the lyings 
(miškěbě) of your father,” which conveys masculine norms of sex as 
opposed to miškěbě iššâ, “lyings of a woman,” feminine norms of 
sex. Lev 18.22; 20.13 should be read word-for-word as “to lie the lyings of a 
woman with a man” or “to lie with a man as a woman,” making the verses 
subject the passive partner (i.e. pathic) and the recipient of the “lying” as 
the active partner, “with a man.” And the recent Generative linguistic 
analysis of the first four books of the Torah by Asya Pereltsvaig (Yale) has 
demonstrated that cognate objects in Biblical Hebrew function either as 
arguments or adverbials; miškěbě iššâ is an adv-CO.  This reading 
is also  supported by a tannaitic colloquy in Sipra Kodeshim 9.14 
(third-century CE): 
A. We heard the punishment, but we did not hear the prohibition. 
B. Scripture says, “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a female”   
C. I only have a prohibition for the penetrator, where is there a prohibition 
for the one penetrated? 
D. [. . .]
E. Rabbi Akiba says, “Do not lie with a male as one lies with a female,” read 
it [qere]: “Do not be laid.” 

R. Akiba’s niphal conjunction with its rereading of the Massoretic qal 
vocalization or the more preferable syntactical reworking would make Lev. 
18.22 address those who are pathics amongst the recently exiled free male 
Israelite citizens (Lev. 17.1; 18.1-3, 27; 19.13, 14; 20.2, 21.1): the 
recipients of the Holiness Code (Lev. 17-26). 


________________________________________________________________
Look for special offers on
NetZero Platinum & NetZero HiSpeed
Visit Best Buy, RadioShack or Kmart Today.