Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Randall:

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com> wrote:

> The discussion about one handwritten text is missing the point:
> to quote Pete in Brother Where Art Thou:
> "that [yr'y by] don't make no sense".
>
> Whether the scrape looks like a yod or waw, we need to read it
> as a waw. And if someone wants to read the first yod as a waw,
> fine, it gives the same sense. wr'w by would mean
> "and they will gaze on me [as if in victory]."


Now to quote you again, “However, while the structure is possible, the
semantics are NOT a good reading, since only ra'a "he saw" normallly takes a
b- preposition for its object, and that for a specific idiom meaning to 'boast
in victory over'. ”

Apparently you misunderstood my answer. I recognize that the B- prefix is
used after R)H to refer to the object looked upon in contexts where it has
nothing to do with boasting in victory over. In fact, most of the times
where R)H is followed by a B- prefix to denote what is looked upon, it has
nothing to do with boasting in victory over.

When reading your examples, I play the devil’s advocate, not because I’m
trying to cut you down, but because I want to see if your evidence is strong
enough to withstand any objection and thereby be convinced.

Even in your example of Psalm 118:7, this can be read in the same meaning as
Psalm 23:5, that even though he is in the presence of his haters, close
enough that he can look them in the eye, they can’t do anything to him. Look
at the context of the previous verse.

>


> As for the idiom involved, I don't know why Karl brought up
> "post-Biblical Hebrew" and "again".
>

You should know why, which is all I have to say on this subject.


>
> Since Karl brought up extra-biblical sources I can cite a classic
> text in stone from around 800BCE about 50 miles east of
> Jerusalem.…
>

The one criticism is that even though Moabite was quite close to Hebrew,
probably close enough that there was mutual understanding of the spoken
languages, it is still possible for one language to have idioms that the
other lacks, and visa versa.

>
> Compare Jos 7.21 “and I will gaze on magnificent plunder.”
> See line 7 below, too.)
>

Joshua 7:21 can be read as a locative, “among the plunder”. When looking at
examples of R)H followed by a B- prefix, a clear majority of them are
locative, not indicative of the object being looked at.


> Cf. Ps 118.7 “and I will gaze upon my enemies”.
>

See above.


> Mi 7.10 “My eyes will see on her (my enmity).”
>

See verse 9, “…I will look at his justice.” clearly not a victor’s boast
over his enemies. So in the context, verse 10 looks like a simple object of
vision, not a victor’s boast. Especially since the context indicates that
this is a work of God, not of the viewer.



> For a more explicit expansion compare
> Ps 37.34 : “and you will see on the cutting off of the wicked.”
>

Again this is a work of God, not of the psalmist, therefore no boast but
merely the recognition that the just will observe the destruction of the
wicked.


> Ps 112.8 “until he will see on his enemies'.
>

I saved the best for last, because this is your strongest example. This is
the only example that you presented where the idea of victory seems to be
included with the idea of looking. But if there’s any boast, it is found in
the first two words of the psalm, “Boast in the Lord” because the victory is
from God, not from the person.

>
> With the above biblical idiom in one's repertoire
> Ps 22:18 reads very straightfoward --
> as implying the gloating of the enemies of the psalmist, as if they think
> they are seeing victory.
> And as stated, the first letter can be read as 'w' or 'y' and the same
> idiom and
> sense results. But the 'w' of [yr'w by] only makes good, clear sense as
> a 'w', not a 'y'.
> So I read it as yr'w by, both the MT and the Qumran fragment.
>
> blessings
> Randall Buth
>
>
> With only one example that clearly backs you up, and the majority of the
examples simple indications of the object being looked at, that is of those
that are not indications of the locative, there is no reason not to
translate it as (to take the MT reading) “…they stare, they look at me.”

Karl W. Randolph.