Replies

I am as pleased as you to be having this conversation on cordial terms. One never knows how it will go at the beginning of such dialogues. I am pleased to discuss this in a spirit of peace.

But of course I will also be honest with you. Therefore, I must apologize. I made an error in my previous post. I said the vav prefix made it a past perfect. Exactly wrong. It should have be future imperfect. It has no impact on the root analysis, so we still end up at the same place, but I wanted to clear that up. Sorry.

Anyway, yes, I am familiar with Koniuchowsky’s argument, and I am not impressed. Let me see if I can break this down for you into the pivotal issues.

Rabbi Koniuchowsky (hereinafter just RK) makes an argument from uniqueness of the word form that it must have a special meaning, and that meaning must be “mixed.” As I said before, there is nothing about the form of the word that requires a special interpretation. It is simply a Niphal conjugation of “to bless.”

Nevertheless, RK attempts to justify a special treatment for the term as conjugated because, he claims, several Talmudic authorities may use the word as possibly meaning “grafted/mixed.” However, only one of those authorities even begins to make a case, and even that one instance is embroiled in controversy.

Nevertheless, let’s review his offers of proof to see what we can make of them.

1. Rashbam.

In what I think is probably the best argument for “grafted,” the medieval rabbi Rashbam argues that the root here was not “b-r-k” at all, but a rare passive form of b-r-kh, which means “to kneel.” From this he abstracts kneeling to bending, and from bending he posits an agricultural use where a vine is bent into the ground to produce a new shoot, viewing it as a step in the grafting process.

However, other rabbinical scholars have reviewed his work and found it unconvincing.

For example, Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, one of the top thinkers of medieval rabbinical studies, openly disagreed with Rashbam, saying, “A great scholar wrote in his book that ‘they shall bless themselves by you’ means ‘to graft’ other nations onto your stock. I don’t know where he got this from.”

I agree with Rabbi Ezra. The inferences are too attenuated, too stretched out and weak, to have any authority. The strongest case is that the root is still simply b-r-k, “to bless,” set in passive form.

2. Babylonian Talmud, Nashim, Tractate Sotah 43a

The controversial section RK relies on for his “proof,” in English, is this:

“it is all one whether he planted, bent or grafted it, …”

But if you go to the Hebrew, b-r-k is never translated “grafted” in this passage. Instead, the word translated “grafted” above comes from a form of the root r-k-b. b-r-k does appear, but in proper sequence it is translated “bent,” suggesting it might be derived from b-r-kh, not b-r-k.

If you want to check this out, you can see the Hebrew here:

http://www.e-daf.com/index.asp

Just select the Tractate Sotah 43a from the dropdowns above. They also provide a link to an English translation of the folio.

So what was RK thinking? If he’s a good, honest man, he probably is just using the wrong reference, or else he took the words out of order in a moment of carelessness. It happens. But it still works against him, because this passage actually shows r-k-b is the root you would expect to be used in Genesis if mixing or grafting was really in view. Thus, he inadvertently disproves his own theory.

Inasmuch as I have been unable to verify that any other Talmudic references to “graft” (there are at least 10) are based on the Niphal form of b-r-k, I see no reason to rely on that line of evidence, at least until further, better proof is offered.

There is more to say, but I think the essential points are on the table, and I’d rather not drag this part of the discussion any longer than necessary. For the next round, I’d like to discuss your views of the Gospel. I have a copy of your ebook, and when I have read it, perhaps we can resume the conversation. It may take a few days. I will contact you by freepmail if you are interested in continuing. Just let me know.

Peace,