Prophet Studies

NAHUM  1-3

   A book dealing with the historical fall of Niniveh.

Nahum the prophet: Some notes on the commentary of Yaphet ibn Ali Halevi

The prophet Nahum wrote his book before the fall of Niniveh in 612 BCE and before the fall of Assyria in 608 BCE. There is a text in the British Museum, BM 21901 (96-4-9, 6) that relates all one needs to know about the fall of Niniveh and Assyria. The text is dealing with the early years of Nabopolassar of Babylon and ends with the late years of that king. A. K. Grayson translated it (1975) and some readings can also be found by Jean-Jacques Glassner (1993). From the month of Simanu until the month of Abu, for three months, the forces of Cyaxares [the Mede] made an attack against Niniveh. On the [ ]th day of the month Abu they defeated the city and many people suffered. At that time the king of Assyria died, Sin-šar-iškun died. A large booty from the city and the temple were carried away and they turned the city into a ruin heap. On the 20th day of Ululu [14th of September 612 BCE] Cyaxarus and his army went home. According to the text the walls of Niniveh may have been partly reconstructed again? In the 17th year of Nabopolassar in the month of Du'uzu the Assyrian king Aššur-uballit, with the assistance of a large army from Egypt, crossed the river of Euphrates and marched against Harran to conquer it. It appears as if the king of Akkad or Babylon was on the retreat but then in the 18th year [608-607 BCE], in the month Ululu, the king of Akkad [Babylon] mustered his army and [lacuna]. For the outcome we have to guess. The words following is a wish "Let the one who loves [the gods] Nabu and Marduk [Babylonian gods] keep this tablet and not let it stray into other hands" (see http://www.livius.org/ne-nn/niniveh02.html).

In the time that Niniveh was plundered by the Medes in 612 BCE, Josiah of Jerusalem called for a reform with the discovery of the book of Deuteronomy. By this time the prophecies of Nahum was already received and in book form. The reality of the fall of Niniveh in the book of Nahum is historical verified. It is indeed a very reliable source.

Rabbis of the Middle Ages has also commented on the book of Nahum and their texts are available to us for example Rashi (1040-1105), Redak (1157-1236), Ibn Ezra (1140), Mezudath David written by Rabbi Yechiel Hillel Altschuler 18th century, Rabbi Joseph Kimchi (1160-1235), Kara (contemporary and student of Rashi, 1065-1135), Abarbanel (1437-1509) and others.

But our focus today is earlier than these Rabbis and their commentaries on Nahum. Yaphet ibn Ali ha-Levi lived in Jerusalem during the time of the Karaites (950-980) who had a community there. He wrote a commentary in Arabic on Daniel but also on Nahum. It is his Arabic commentary of Nahum that we are considering here. Yaphet ibn Ali ha-Levi is very special since he attempted to put Jewish tradition aside and consider the plain text paying attention to the various opinions that existed before and at his time. He almost had a sola scriptura approach in at time when the twist of arguments had to run through the Jewish traditions and limited by it. If one compares Ibn ha-Levi with Saadia Gaon and Ibn Ezra, then one has a biblical fundamentalist compared to two free-thinkers. Gaon was his contemporary.

What is surprising is that Gaon translated Daniel in Arabic by leaving out words, included errors with corrections in the text, abbreviated the text, lenghthened the text, all aspects that are taboos in serious biblical scholarship. But Judaism calls him the great Saadia Gaon. In Daniel 11:6 for example, Ibn Ezra worked with the corrupt text of Gaon by also rendering the in-text error. Ibn Ezra was then followed by Ralbag or Levi ben Gerson (1288-1344) both rendering the text here following the faulty text of Gaon. The bulk of voices against Gaon should have been known to Ibn Ezra and he should not have followed Gaon. Gaon used a glossing methodology in rendering a commentary on Job. It appears as if Gaon's method of commentary is eisegesis not exegesis. Gaon practiced permutation, glossing, paraphrasing and ended with a metamorphosis translation. Is grandmother a paraphrase of grammar or is it a permutation of grammar or an acoustic misperception of grammar? This is the dilemma we deal with when we analyze the Arabic texts of Saadia Gaon. Yaphet is more promising in comparison with Gaon. Especially his Arabic translation, which is sometimes more literal and careful than the paraphrases of Gaon, can be mentioned.

The translation we are using here is that of Hartwig Hirschfeld of the text of Nahum (Y. Yaron, Angels and Fire: Yefet ben `Eli HaLewi on Dani'el and Nahum [Al-Qirqisani Center for the Promotion of Karaite Studies, 2003]). The Arabic text for Daniel is that of D. S. Margoliouth.

Nahum the Elkoshite (1:1)

According to Rashi, Elkosh is a city name. This is also what Yaphet (980) made it. He translated "Nahum of Elqosh". The Targum Jonathan to the prophets reshuffled the letters so that it is eshqa'h. This is taboo. Ibn Ezra thought it is patronimic and derived from the name of one of his forefathers. In the Assyrian times when this prophecy was received, it was customary to sometimes place in cuneiform writing m for man, dingir for god and then a name like qosh. A person's name may be El-Natan which is the deity epithet added to a verb for "he gives or he gave". So what is qosh? City name or person?

The Lord avenges Himself to His adversaries and He watches to His enemies (1:2)

Yaphet did a very interesting thing here, he separated the two classes of enemies of the Lord so that the adversaries are those who will die in the eschaton of which Isaiah 10:23 and Daniel 12:1 speaks but that the enemies are those who "show no such hostile feelings".

Bashan, Carmel, Lebanon (1:4)

Yaphet in 980 suggested that the verse is allegorical and that Bashan and Carmel stands for two kingdoms, "Edom [Byzantium] and Ishmael [the Arabs] whose rule extends along the ocean over the world". The rivers are in his rendering "the great Emirs". There was another explanation available in the time of Yaphet and he mentioned it. It stated that Bashan and Carmel stands for two generals. Lebanon refers to royal princes and the mountains for the other kingdoms. He rejected this second opinion. Rashi said that "Bashan and Carmel are two good dwelling places". The truth is that they are probably literal geographical spaces in the time of Nahum the prophet. Rashi felt that these places are within the time frame when God delivers Assyria in the hands of Nebuchadnezzar.

And with an overrunning flood He shall make an end from its place and darkness shall pursue His enemies (1:8)

Yaphet felt that this verse is the turning point. Whereas verses 1-7 spoke of the World at large, verse 8 returns to Niniveh only. Redak also felt that verse 8 refers to Niniveh. For Ibn Ezra it means that the end of Niniveh will not be little by little but all at once. The darkness that shall pursue His enemies is explained by Ibn Ezra as refering to a place of darkness. Targum Jonathan to the prophets renders it with "He shall deliver His enemies to Gehinnom". Redak is closer to the truth when he wrote "He shall cause darkness to pursue His enemies".

Yaphet is not exactly sure if it is Niniveh. He said that if Babel is meant by this verse, then the flood refers to the "Kings of the North" of Daniel 11:40, 44.

From you has emanated one who plots evil against the Lord, one who counsels wickedness (1:11)

Yaphet felt in 980 that the kings of Assyria went forth to destroy Israel. He contemplates a second interpretation that is allegorical and means that Babylon is meant. If that is the case, then it is the Little Horn of Daniel 7 that is meant here. The words counsels of wickedness, or as he has it in the Arabic, "counsels of iniquity" refers in his opinion either to Sennacherib or to Babylon and the "Man of the Spirit" [in Yaphet's thinking, Mohammed]. Rashi later also said that it refers to Sennacherib. Rashi was convinced that it refers to Niniveh. Rashi felt that Sennacherib thought of destroying the earthly abode and the heavenly abode. We must remember that Niniveh was also called Babylon in ancient times since it was also the Gate of the gods = bab-ilu. The reality is that by the time Nahum prophecied, Ashurbanipal's library contained many plagiaristic examples of an amalgamation of the Hebrew works of Moses and Psalms, Gilgamesh Epic, Rebellion in Heaven Motif, Enuma Elish, Fall of Man and other themes of the Old Testament, reworked and fused by exiled secularized Jews in captivity for the scribes of Niniveh. The reality is that Israelites were in Niniveh since 723 BCE. The prophecies of Nahum is a century later. Jews in America is a good example of what happened with Jews in Assyria. Of course there were those who kept to the pure words of the Lord.

And the Lord shall command concerning you: No more of your name shall be sown, from the house of your god I will cut off a graven image and a molten image, I will make your grave, for you have become worthless (1:14)

Yaphet felt in 980 that there are two explanations here: either it refers to Sennacherib who will die due to the murders of his sons or allegorically to the descendants of Mohammed. Yaphet equates the Little Horn of Daniel 7 with the life and works and continuation of Mohammed and his descendants. The idol he felt is the holy shrine in Mecca "to which they make pilgrimages every year". He felt that "Arms will rise against them, and slaughter them". Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Redak all felt that the king of Assyria was addressed here.

For the Lord has restored the pride of Jacob as the pride of Israel, for the emptiers have emptied them out and destroyed their branches (2:3)

The Arabic translation of Yaphet is problematic here: "For the Lord brings back the power of Jacob, as the power of Israel, now they have overthrown them and destroyed their cities". Branches as cities?

        What happened here with Yaphet in 980, is that he had a Hebrew manuscript of the consonantal text of the Masoretic tradition but in a very bad handwriting. Due to slips of the hand [bad orthography as a result of speedy copies or other reasons] a slip of the eye occurred. Instead of reading {hyrmzw wzmryhm = “and their branches”, he misread the three letters as {tyrqh hqrytm ending with = “their cities”.
         It was not a paraphrasing or interpretation on his part. He wished to be as literal to the original as possible but possible was not that easy since the handwriting of the text was faulty.
         He sees the scatterer as Israel who is restored firstly, and secondly he said that if the scatterer is the enemy that marches "against Babel (Bagdad)" then it means that God will bring salvation by the Messiah Who is the might of Jacob.

Because of the many harlotries of the harlot, charming and enchanting, who delivers nations with her harlotries, and families with her enchantments (3:4)

The punishment in this chapter used the same words that we find for the punishment predicted against Satan and his proxies in Isaiah 14:12-4, Daniel 8:11 and Ezechiel 28, namely the word hishlak = to scatter to the ground. See the word used in Nahum 3:6. Yaphet made the comment about the above verse, "this is explained in the direction of Babel [= Mohammed's descendants in his thinking] the verse describes the alluring ways of the Little Horn and its armed strength, by means of which the king holds power as alluded to in Daniel 9." It is interesting that someone as early as 980 could operate with a Little Horn identification for the year post 680. Of course the true identification lies not with Islam but with the Roman elements of the religion so that the Vatican is a better choice. It also connects better with the year day principle applied to the time zones mentioned in Daniel.

Are you better than No-Amon which is situated among the rivers? (3:8)

Yaphet translated in 980 "Are you better than the city of Alexandria which sits by the canals, water surrounds her". The concept that No-Amon is Alexandria was also suggested later by Rashi, Redak, Kara and Targum Jonathan to the prophets. Ibn Ezra felt that it was an Egyptian city that was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar on his way to Niniveh. It is definitely not Alexandria since this city was created by Alexander the Great and Nahum lived in the 7th century BCE. My professor Charles Fensham suggested that it refers to Memphis.

Studies in the Prophets are navigtional for the soul

koot van wyk (DLitt et Phil; ThD)

Visiting Professor

Kyungpook National University

Sangju Campus

South Korea

Conjoint lecturer of Avondale College

Australia

2 October 2011