Difference between revisions of "Dictionary:Changing Meanings/0"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 5: Line 5:
 
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
 
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
 
<category>Within the Biblical Period
 
<category>Within the Biblical Period
<p>There are many words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:</p>
+
<p>There are many words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:</p><ul>
<ul>
 
 
<li><b>בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – In most of Sefer Bereshit<fn>See Bereshit 42:5, 45:2 and 46:5. In several other verses () the meaning of the term is ambiguous.&#160; See discussion below.</fn> and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot<fn>The phrase "בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" in Shemot 1:1 clearly refers to the sons of Yaakov but verse 7 is ambiguous and could refer either to Yaakov's sons or to the entire Israelite nation. This depends on whether the verse is still part of the opening summary of Sefer Bereshit (cf. Bereshit 47:27) or is referring to events after the brothers' death.</fn> the term&#160; refers to the sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.&#160; The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "<b>עַם</b> בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",&#8206;<fn>This is the only place in Tanakh in which this exact term is used and there are only two other places in Tanakh (Shemot 3:10, 7:4) where Hashem uses a similar term, "עַמִּי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".</fn> perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.<fn>See R. Hirsch on Shemot 1:1 and 9 who implies this.</fn>&#160; There are several cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:</li>
 
<li><b>בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל</b> – In most of Sefer Bereshit<fn>See Bereshit 42:5, 45:2 and 46:5. In several other verses () the meaning of the term is ambiguous.&#160; See discussion below.</fn> and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot<fn>The phrase "בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" in Shemot 1:1 clearly refers to the sons of Yaakov but verse 7 is ambiguous and could refer either to Yaakov's sons or to the entire Israelite nation. This depends on whether the verse is still part of the opening summary of Sefer Bereshit (cf. Bereshit 47:27) or is referring to events after the brothers' death.</fn> the term&#160; refers to the sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.&#160; The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "<b>עַם</b> בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",&#8206;<fn>This is the only place in Tanakh in which this exact term is used and there are only two other places in Tanakh (Shemot 3:10, 7:4) where Hashem uses a similar term, "עַמִּי בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל".</fn> perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.<fn>See R. Hirsch on Shemot 1:1 and 9 who implies this.</fn>&#160; There are several cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:</li>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
Line 19: Line 18:
 
<category>Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew
 
<category>Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>אמה</b> – In Tanakh, the word אמה means either maidservant (when spelled without a <i>dagesh</i>) , or a unit of measure (when spelled with a <i>dagesh</i>). In Rabbinic Hebrew, it may be used to refer also to the forearm itself. See the dispute in&#160;<multilink><a href="BavliSotah12b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah12b" data-aht="source">Sotah 12b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> regarding the meaning of the phrase "וַתִּשְׁלַח אֶת אֲמָתָהּ וַתִּקָּחֶהָ" in <a href="Shemot2-5-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a>, where one opinions suggests that the daughter of Paroh extended her arm, rather than sending her servant, to retrieve Moshe. Ibn Ezra rejects this possibility noting both the missing <i>dagesh</i><fn>Others, such as Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor, note this as well.</fn> and the fact that "גם אמה מדה היא, כי הזרוע לא תקרא אמה".&#8206;<fn>Shadal makes the same point, but suggests one possible exception, the description of the size of Og's bed in Devarim 3:11, "עַרְשׂוֹ עֶרֶשׂ בַּרְזֶל הֲלֹה הִוא בְּרַבַּת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן תֵּשַׁע אַמּוֹת אׇרְכָּהּ וְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת רׇחְבָּהּ <b>בְּאַמַּת אִישׁ</b>". He notes, though, that even in this verse the phrase "אַמַּת אִישׁ" might refer to the measurement rather than an actual arm.</fn></li>
+
<li><b>אמה</b> – In Tanakh, the word אמה means either maidservant (when spelled without a <i>dagesh</i>) , or a unit of measure (when spelled with a <i>dagesh</i>). In Rabbinic Hebrew, it may be used to refer also to the forearm itself. See the dispute in&#160;<multilink><a href="BavliSotah12b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah12b" data-aht="source">Sotah 12b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> regarding the meaning of the phrase "וַתִּשְׁלַח אֶת אֲמָתָהּ וַתִּקָּחֶהָ" in <a href="Shemot2-5-6" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a>, where one opinions suggests that the daughter of Paroh extended her arm, rather than sending her servant, to retrieve Moshe. <multilink><a href="IbnEzraShemotFirstCommentary2-5" data-aht="source">Ibn Ezra </a><a href="IbnEzraShemotFirstCommentary2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot First Commentary 2:5</a><a href="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham ibn Ezra</a></multilink>rejects this possibility noting both the missing <i>dagesh</i><fn>Others, such as Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor, note this as well.</fn> and the fact that "גם אמה מדה היא, כי הזרוע לא תקרא אמה".&#8206;<fn><multilink><a href="ShadalShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalShemot2-5" data-aht="source">Shemot 2:5</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink>&#160;makes the same point, but suggests one possible exception, the description of the size of Og's bed in Devarim 3:11, "עַרְשׂוֹ עֶרֶשׂ בַּרְזֶל הֲלֹה הִוא בְּרַבַּת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן תֵּשַׁע אַמּוֹת אׇרְכָּהּ וְאַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת רׇחְבָּהּ <b>בְּאַמַּת אִישׁ</b>". He notes, though, that even in this verse the phrase "אַמַּת אִישׁ" might refer to the measurement rather than an actual arm.</fn></li>
<li><b>בית</b> - In Tanakh, this root generally refers to either a physical house<fn>See, for example, Bereshit 12:15, 19:2, 24:3 or 33:17.</fn> or receptacle, or a family or household.<fn>See, for example, Bereshit 7:1, 35:2 or 36:6.</fn> In Rabbinic Hebrew it is also understood more narrowly to refer specifically to a wife. See&#160;<multilink><a href="#" data-aht="source">Sifra Vayikra 16:32</a></multilink> who adopts this later meaning to <a href="Vayikra16-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 16:17</a>, explaining, "וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ" to mean "and he will atone for himself and his wife".</li>
+
<li><b>בית</b> - In Tanakh, this root generally refers to either a physical house<fn>See, for example, Bereshit 12:15, 19:2, 24:3 or 33:17.</fn> or receptacle, or a family or household.<fn>See, for example, Bereshit 7:1, 35:2 or 36:6.</fn> In Rabbinic Hebrew it is also understood more narrowly to refer specifically to a wife.</li>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>See&#160;<multilink><a href="#" data-aht="source">Sifra Vayikra 16:32</a></multilink> who adopts this later meaning to <a href="Vayikra16-17" data-aht="source">Vayikra 16</a>, explaining, "וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ" to mean "and he will atone for himself and his wife".</li>
 +
<li>See also Lekach Tov and Chizkuni on Shemot 1:1 who understand the phrase&#160; "אִישׁ וּבֵיתוֹ בָּאוּ" there also to refer to Yaakov's sons and their wives. See, though, Ibn Ezra who argues against this reading, noting: "אין בית בכל המקרא אשה".</li>
 +
</ul>
 
<li><b>דָּמִֽים</b> – In Tanakh this word is related to blood /life whereas in Mishnaic Hebrew it also takes the meaning of "money".<fn>See, for instance,&#160; <a href="MishnaMaaserSheni1-5" data-aht="source">Mishna Maaser Sheni 1:5</a>, <a href="MishnaBavaMetzia5-3" data-aht="source">Mishna Bava Metzia 5:3</a> and<a href="MishnaBavaMetzia5-9" data-aht="source"> 5:9</a>, and <a href="MishnaBavaBatra2-7" data-aht="source">Mishna Bava Batra 2:7</a>.</fn>&#160; This later usage might have influenced the interpretation of&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamShemot22-1" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot22-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot22-2" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot22-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:2</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink> to&#160;<a href="Shemot22-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:1-2</a> who understand the phrases "אֵין/יש לוֹ דָּמִים" to mean "תשלומי דמים", perhaps combining the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of the term.&#160; Cf. Ibn Janach who explains similarly, claiming that the verse in Shemot and the parallel phrase "אֵין לוֹ דָּם" in&#160;<a href="Bemidbar35-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 35:27</a> both mean ransom.<fn>He further claims that the phrase in Tehillim 72, "וְיֵיקַר <b>דָּמָם</b> בְּעֵינָיו" means not life but value or worth.</fn></li>
 
<li><b>דָּמִֽים</b> – In Tanakh this word is related to blood /life whereas in Mishnaic Hebrew it also takes the meaning of "money".<fn>See, for instance,&#160; <a href="MishnaMaaserSheni1-5" data-aht="source">Mishna Maaser Sheni 1:5</a>, <a href="MishnaBavaMetzia5-3" data-aht="source">Mishna Bava Metzia 5:3</a> and<a href="MishnaBavaMetzia5-9" data-aht="source"> 5:9</a>, and <a href="MishnaBavaBatra2-7" data-aht="source">Mishna Bava Batra 2:7</a>.</fn>&#160; This later usage might have influenced the interpretation of&#160;<multilink><a href="RashbamShemot22-1" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamShemot22-1" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:1</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink> and&#160;<multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot22-2" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot22-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:2</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink> to&#160;<a href="Shemot22-1-2" data-aht="source">Shemot 22:1-2</a> who understand the phrases "אֵין/יש לוֹ דָּמִים" to mean "תשלומי דמים", perhaps combining the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of the term.&#160; Cf. Ibn Janach who explains similarly, claiming that the verse in Shemot and the parallel phrase "אֵין לוֹ דָּם" in&#160;<a href="Bemidbar35-27" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 35:27</a> both mean ransom.<fn>He further claims that the phrase in Tehillim 72, "וְיֵיקַר <b>דָּמָם</b> בְּעֵינָיו" means not life but value or worth.</fn></li>
 
<li><b>חותן/חותנת and חם/חמות </b>– Biblical Hebrew distinguishes between a father-in-law on the husband and wife's side, using distinct terms for each.&#160; The wife's father is referred to as a חותן,&#8206;<fn>See, for example, Shofetim 19:4,7,9.&#160; It is possible that the term might refer also to a brother-in-law (or even another relative) as the term relates to the individual who contracted the marriage. [See Ibn Janach.] This bears on the identity of "חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" mentioned in many verses, yet with reference to different individuals. See&#160;<a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a> and <a href="Dictionary:חֹתֵן – חֹתֶנֶת" data-aht="page">חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת</a> for elaboration.</fn> while the husband's father is referred to as a חם.&#8206;<fn>See, for instance, see Bereshit 38:13,25 and Shemuel I 4:19,21.</fn> Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, does not preserve the distinction and uses the terms חם and חמות to refer also to the parents of the wife.<fn>See, for example, see Mishna Demai 3:6, Pesachim 3:7, Yevamot 1:1, and Ketubot 1:5.</fn>&#160; For further discussion, see&#160;<a href="Dictionary:חֹתֵן – חֹתֶנֶת" data-aht="page">חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת</a>.</li>
 
<li><b>חותן/חותנת and חם/חמות </b>– Biblical Hebrew distinguishes between a father-in-law on the husband and wife's side, using distinct terms for each.&#160; The wife's father is referred to as a חותן,&#8206;<fn>See, for example, Shofetim 19:4,7,9.&#160; It is possible that the term might refer also to a brother-in-law (or even another relative) as the term relates to the individual who contracted the marriage. [See Ibn Janach.] This bears on the identity of "חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה" mentioned in many verses, yet with reference to different individuals. See&#160;<a href="Yitro – Names" data-aht="page">Yitro – Names</a> and <a href="Dictionary:חֹתֵן – חֹתֶנֶת" data-aht="page">חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת</a> for elaboration.</fn> while the husband's father is referred to as a חם.&#8206;<fn>See, for instance, see Bereshit 38:13,25 and Shemuel I 4:19,21.</fn> Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, does not preserve the distinction and uses the terms חם and חמות to refer also to the parents of the wife.<fn>See, for example, see Mishna Demai 3:6, Pesachim 3:7, Yevamot 1:1, and Ketubot 1:5.</fn>&#160; For further discussion, see&#160;<a href="Dictionary:חֹתֵן – חֹתֶנֶת" data-aht="page">חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת</a>.</li>

Version as of 11:09, 3 October 2020

Lexical: Changing Meanings

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Within the Biblical Period

There are many words whose meaning might have changed from one period within Tanakh to another:

  • בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל – In most of Sefer Bereshit1 and the opening verses of Sefer Shemot2 the term  refers to the sons of Yaakov, whereas afterwards it refers to the nation of Israel.  The turning point might be Shemot 1:9, which uniquely states "עַם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל",‎3 perhaps to clarify that the people have become a nation.4  There are several cases in which the meaning of the term is ambiguous:
    • Bereshit 32:33 "לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת גִּיד הַנָּשֶׁה" – See the debate in Bavli Chulin 100b whether this refers to something Yaakov's sons accepted upon themselves or whether this was a prohibition first commanded to the nation at at Sinai and placed in Sefer Bereshit to provide the reasoning.5
    • Bereshit 36:30
  • שבת
  • חדש – In Torah the word refers to a month, while in Neviim it also takes on the meaning of "Rosh Chodesh", the first of the month.6
  • חתן

Biblical vs. Rabbinic Hebrew

  • אמה – In Tanakh, the word אמה means either maidservant (when spelled without a dagesh) , or a unit of measure (when spelled with a dagesh). In Rabbinic Hebrew, it may be used to refer also to the forearm itself. See the dispute in Bavli SotahSotah 12bAbout the Bavli regarding the meaning of the phrase "וַתִּשְׁלַח אֶת אֲמָתָהּ וַתִּקָּחֶהָ" in Shemot 2:5, where one opinions suggests that the daughter of Paroh extended her arm, rather than sending her servant, to retrieve Moshe. Ibn Ezra Shemot First Commentary 2:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezrarejects this possibility noting both the missing dagesh7 and the fact that "גם אמה מדה היא, כי הזרוע לא תקרא אמה".‎8
  • בית - In Tanakh, this root generally refers to either a physical house9 or receptacle, or a family or household.10 In Rabbinic Hebrew it is also understood more narrowly to refer specifically to a wife.
    • See Sifra Vayikra 16:32 who adopts this later meaning to Vayikra 16, explaining, "וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ" to mean "and he will atone for himself and his wife".
    • See also Lekach Tov and Chizkuni on Shemot 1:1 who understand the phrase  "אִישׁ וּבֵיתוֹ בָּאוּ" there also to refer to Yaakov's sons and their wives. See, though, Ibn Ezra who argues against this reading, noting: "אין בית בכל המקרא אשה".
  • דָּמִֽים – In Tanakh this word is related to blood /life whereas in Mishnaic Hebrew it also takes the meaning of "money".11  This later usage might have influenced the interpretation of RashbamShemot 22:1About R. Shemuel b. Meir and ChizkuniShemot 22:2About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach to Shemot 22:1-2 who understand the phrases "אֵין/יש לוֹ דָּמִים" to mean "תשלומי דמים", perhaps combining the Biblical and Rabbinic usage of the term.  Cf. Ibn Janach who explains similarly, claiming that the verse in Shemot and the parallel phrase "אֵין לוֹ דָּם" in Bemidbar 35:27 both mean ransom.12
  • חותן/חותנת and חם/חמות – Biblical Hebrew distinguishes between a father-in-law on the husband and wife's side, using distinct terms for each.  The wife's father is referred to as a חותן,‎13 while the husband's father is referred to as a חם.‎14 Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, does not preserve the distinction and uses the terms חם and חמות to refer also to the parents of the wife.15  For further discussion, see חֹתֵן / חֹתֶנֶת.
  • כל –
  • מלאך – In Biblical Hebrew "מַלְאָךְ" refers to any type of messenger,16 not specifically an angel. Divine messengers are singled out by the terms "מַלְאַךְ אֱלֹהִים" or "'מַלְאַךְ ה".  In Rabbinic Hebrew, in contrast, "מַלְאָךְ" takes on the much more specific connotation of "angel". It is possible that the change is usage is related to the increasing prevalence of the word "שליח". This synonym never appears in Tanakh, but by Mishnaic times it is widespread, becoming the preferred word to express a human messenger, allowing for a narrower definition of "מלאך".
  • מס – Hoil MosheShemot 1:11Bemidbar 31:28About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi points out that "מס" in Tanakh refers to a labor tax rather than a monetary one,17 noting that the Biblical term for a monetary tribute is מנחה  or מכס.  This relates to a dispute among commentators regarding how to understand the role of the "tax officers" mentioned in Shemot 1:11. Though many assume this refers to those who oversaw the forced labor, RalbagShemot Beur HaMilot 1:11About R. Levi b. Gershom suggests it refers to collection of a fiscal payment.  Ralbag opines that only those who could not afford the monetary fine were forced to labor for Paroh. See discussion in Who was Enslaved in Egypt.
  • מקום – Ibn EzraBereshit First Commentary 28:11Esther First Commentary IntroductionAbout R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that in Tanakh, the word "מקום" never refers to Hashem and always connotes a location.  It is only the Sages who use the term to refer also to Hashem due to his omnipresence.18 This leads Ibn Ezra to reject both the Midrashic interpretation that the phrase, "וַיִּפְגַּע בַּמָּקוֹם" in Bereshit 28:11 means that Yaakov prayed to Hashem19 and those who explain that Esther 4:14, "רֶוַח וְהַצָּלָה יַעֲמוֹד לַיְּהוּדִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר", refers to Hashem's salvation.20
  • עולם Ibn EzraKohelet 3:11Tehillim Second Commentary 66:7About R. Avraham ibn Ezra notes that throughout Tanakh the word "עוֹלָם" is a marker of time, connoting a long duration or eternity. It is only in Rabbinic sources that the word takes on the extra meaning of "world".21 [In Tanakh, the word used to describe the world is "תֵּבֵל".] As such, he claims that when explaining verses which can sustain both meanings (see Tehillim 66:7, Tehillim 89:3Mishlei 10:24-25 and Kohelet 3:11)22 the prevalent meaning of "eternity" should be adopted.
  • עַם הָאָרֶץ – In Rabbinic Hebrew this term refers to someone who does not have much Torah knowledge or is not careful in keeping the laws of purity or tithing.23  In Tanakh, in contrast, it refers to those living in the land.24
  • צדקה - Though, in Rabbinic sources, the word צדקה refers to charity and giving of alms, R"Y KaraDevarim 24:13-14About R. Yosef Kara notes that it never takes this meaning in Tanakh, but rather refers to justice or righteousness. [It is, thus, often paired with the word "משפט".]
  • In Rabbinic sources the word צדיק often refers to one who is extraordinarily righteous.  In Tanakh, though, it is possible that the word simply means innocent or just, but not exceptionally so.25  The difference might affect one's understanding of several verses.  Was Noach saved because he was extremely virtuous, or was he simply the only upright individual?  Was Avraham asking that Hashem not destroy the righteous of Sedom, or only to not collectively punish the innocent?

Biblical vs. Modern Hebrew

  • נִין וָנֶכֶד‎‎26‎‎‎‎‎ – This pair of words appears three times in Tanakh, always in this order.  As such, in context, the terms would appear to mean child and grandchild respectively,27 or perhaps refer more generally to descendants (with no differentiation between the terms).28 Grandchildren and great-grandchildren (the third and fourth generations) are instead referred to as "שלש" and "רבע".‎29  In Modern Hebrew, in contrast, נין and נכד no longer take on the general connotation of "descendant", and the chronological order is reversed and moved down a generation, with נכד referring to a grandson and נין referring to a great-grandson.