- Texts and versions
The development of biblical exegesis and hermeneutics in Judaism
Early stages
The beginnings of biblical exegesis are found in the Old Testament itself, where earlier documents are interpreted in later documents, as in the recasting of earlier laws in later codes or in the Chroniclerâs reworking of material in Samuel and Kings. In addition, even before the Babylonian Exile (586 bce) there is evidence of the kind of midrashic exposition (nonliteral interpretations) familiar in the rabbinical period (c. 300 bceâc. 500 ce) and after.
In Isaiah 40 and following, the restoration of Israel after the return from exile is portrayed as a new creation: the characteristic verbs of the Genesis creation narrativeââcreateâ (bara), âmakeâ (Êżasa) and âformâ (yatzar)âare used of this new act of God (e.g., Isaiah 43:7). Even more clearly are the same events portrayed as a new Exodus: on their journey back from Babylon, as earlier through the wilderness, the God of Israel makes a way for his people; he protects them before and behind; he champions them âwith a mighty hand and an outstretched armâ; he brings water from the rock for their sustenance (Isaiah 43:2, 16, 19; 48:21; 52:12; Ezekiel 20:33).
A pattern of divine action in mercy and judgment is discernible as one moves from the earlier prophets to the later prophets and apocalyptists (those concerned with the intervention of God in history). Yahwehâs âstrange workâ in bringing the Assyrians against Israel in the 8th century bce (Isaiah 28:21; 29:14) is repeated a century later when he raises up the Chaldaeans (Babylonians) to execute his judgment (Habakkuk 1:5 fol.). Ezekielâs visionary figure Gog is the invader whose aggression was foretold in earlier days by Yahweh through his âservants the prophetsâ (Ezekiel 38:17), and one may recognize in him a revival not only of Isaiahâs Assyrian (Isaiah 10:4 fol.) but also of Jeremiahâs destroyer from the north (Jeremiah 1:14 fol.; 4:6 fol.). The same figure reappears in the last âking of the northâ in Daniel 11:40 fol.; he too is diverted from his path by âtidings from the east and the northâ (cf. Isaiah 37:7) and âshall come to his end, with none to help himâ (cf. Isaiah 31:8).
In some degree these later predictions are interpretations, or reinterpretations, of the earlier ones, as when the non-Israelite prophet Balaamâs âshipsâŠfrom Kittimâ (Numbers 24:24) are interpreted in Daniel 11:30 as the Roman vessels off Alexandria in 168 bce that frustrated the Syrian king Antiochus IV Epiphanes (c. 215â164/163 bce) in his attempt to annex Egypt.
Ezra (c. 400 bce), whose role as the archetypal âscribeâ is magnified by tradition, is said in the canonical literature to have brought the law of God from Babylonia to Jerusalem (Ezra 7:14), where it was read aloud to a large assembly by relays of readers âwith interpretationââand âthey gave the sense, so that the people understood the readingâ (Nehemiah 8:8). This may be the first recorded use of an Aramaic Targumâa paraphrase of the Hebrew that included interpretation as well as translation.
In the scribal and rabbinic tradition, two forms of exposition were early distinguishedâpeshaáč, âplain meaning,â and derash, âinterpretation,â by which religious or social morals were derived, often artificially, from the text. There was, however, no sense of conflict between the two.
The Hellenistic period
The translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek by Alexandrian Jews in the 2nd and 3rd centuries bce provided opportunities for recording interpretations that were probably current in Hellenistic Judaism. Literal translations might be misleading to Greek readers; metaphors natural in Hebrew were rendered into less-figurative Greek. âWalking with Godâ or âwalking before Godâ was rendered as âpleasing God.â Such renderings are scarcely to be called antianthropomorphisms (that is, against depicting God in human terms or forms). In certain books there are some renderings that might be so described; in Exodus 24:10, for example, âthey saw the God of Israelâ becomes âthey saw the place where the God of Israel stood,â but an examination of the Hebrew context suggests that this is precisely what was seen.
There was a tendency to universalize certain particularist statements of the Hebrew: in Amos 9:11 fol. the prophecy that Davidâs dynasty will repossess the residue of Edom becomes a promise that the residue of men (the Gentiles) will seek the true Godâa promise that is quoted in the New Testament as a âtestimonyâ to the Christian Gentile mission.
The other main contribution to biblical exegesis in Alexandria was made by the Jewish philosopher Philo (c. 30/c. 20 bceâafter 40 ce), whose interpretation of the Pentateuch in terms of Platonic idealism and Stoic ethics had more influence on Christian than on Jewish hermeneutics.
In Palestinian Judaism the most distinctive exegetical work in the Hellenistic period belonged to the QumrÄn community (c. 130 bceâ70 ce), which, believing itself raised up to prepare for the new age of everlasting righteousness, found in scripture the divine purpose about on the point of fulfillment, together with its own duty in the impending crisis. Biblical prophecies in the QumrÄn commentaries refer to persons and events of the recent past, the present, or the imminent future. The time of their fulfillment was concealed from the prophets; only when this was revealed to the Teacher of Righteousness, the organizer of the community, could their intent be grasped.
Rabbinic exegesis was present in all the varieties of rabbinic literature but is found especially in the Targumim and Midrashim (plural of Targum and Midrash). Among the former, special interest attaches to the early Palestinian Pentateuch Targum; it preserves, for example, messianic (referring to the expected anointed deliverer) exegesis of certain passages to which later rabbis gave a different interpretation because of the Christiansâ appeal to them. The earlier Midrashimâthose whose contents are not later than 200 ceâexpound Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and are almost entirely Halakhicâi.e., recording legal interpretations from various schools. The later Midrashim are more homiletic and include a considerable element of Haggadaâi.e., illustrative material drawn from all sources.
Rabbinic exegesis observed rules, which were variously formulated in the schools. The name of the famous interpreter Hillel is linked with seven middot, or norms: (1) inference from less important to more important and vice versa, (2) inference by analogy, (3) the grouping of related passages under an interpretative principle that primarily applies to one of them, (4) similar grouping where the principle primarily applies to two passages, (5) inference from particular to general and vice versa, (6) exposition by means of a similar passage, (7) inference from the context. By the time of Rabbi Ishmael (c. 100 ce), these rules had been expanded to 13, and Eliezer ben Yose the Galilaean (c. 150 ce) formulated 32 rules, reflecting rational principles of exegesis, which remained normative into the Middle Ages.