RelSt 225: Introduction to DSS
DSS Class Minutes # 14 (24 Oct 1966)
by Jin Kyu Kim 


General Topic: Readings in "Para-Biblical" Materials

1. Genesis Apocryphon [=GenApocr] (Garcia Martinez 230ff)

Question: What are the differences between "para-biblical" 
materials such as the  "Genesis Apocyphon" and the "pesharim"? 

One difference is that the "pesharim" are explicit commentaries
characterized by the formulas that get used when they move from 
the biblical text (sometimes called the "lemma") to the 
interpretative comments.  So they have been, somewhat 
artificially, designated by the special term used in the formula, 
"pesher" ("its meaning is") -- thus "pesharim" (plural).
These are the earliest known Jewish commentaries, comparable in 
age to Philo of Alexandria's "Questions and Answers in Genesis" 
and in Exodus ( mid-first century ce). While Philo wrote in his 
native Greek, his commentaries do not survive intact in that 
language, but in various fragments and translations. In these 
works, Philo also quotes a biblical text, then gives the 
interpretations of others as well as his own. Although he does 
not use the pesher formula (or its Greek equivalent), he is 
following the same sort of format -- lemma, then interpretation.
A similar format characterizes the later rabbinic "midrashim." 
These are all explicit commentaries.

When we get to the "para-biblical" materials, they do not display 
that kind of format. They do not distinguish between some 
biblical source text and their own contribution. Rather, they 
provide materials that for the most part parallel what is found 
in biblical texts, sometimes providing more detail, sometimes 
less -- thus they are called "para-biblical." The Genesis 
Apocryphon does not make explicit reference to the biblical book 
of Genesis or other such sources. It reflects many of the same 
stories and themes as are found in biblical Genesis, but they are 
told -- or perhaps retold -- without explicit reference to the 
biblical accounts. Reading the Genesis Apocryphon is like reading 
Genesis itself.
    
We can compare the translation by Garcia Martinez [=GM] with that 
in  the recently published translation by Wise, Abegg and Cook 
[=WAC], where the "Genesis Apocryphon" is called "Tales of the 
Patriarchs" -- these titles are modern, attempting to capture the 
contents of the hitherto unknown writing. Since it is from Qumran 
cave 1, it is among the first texts translated in WAC, which is 
organized quite differently from GM. This particular DSS text is 
in Aramaic, not Hebrew, and that may be significant; some 
scholars argue that the Aramaic materials probably were adopted 
by the DSS sectarians rather than generated by them, in contrast 
to such texts as the (Hebrew) Manual of Discipline or 
commentaries. Many of the other Aramaic materials among the DSS 
represent texts that we knew about from our pre-DSS collections 
of "Apocrypha" and "pseudepigrapha" -- such as the Enoch cycle, 
Jubilees, Testaments of the Patriarchs, Tobit, and the like. 
Prior to the DSS discoveries, it was not clear what the original 
languages of these writings might have been, but now Aramaic 
seems most likely. According to this theory, then, the Genesis 
Apocryphon might be more ancient than the sectarian Hebrew DSS 
with which it came to be associated. 

The first part of the GenApocr [GM 230] seems to allude to 
material that resembles the controversial "mythological" passage 
in Genesis 6.1-4, about the "sons of God" generating unusual 
children with the "daughters of men."  In the GenApocr col 2 [= 
"col 3" in WAC], Lamech questions his wife Bitenosh about the 
unique child to which she has just given birth (Noah), suspecting 
that perhaps she was impregnated by a "foreigner or Watcher of 
Son of Heaven" (line 16). Lamech even checks things out with his 
grandfather, the wise Enoch, who confirms that Lamech is indeed 
the father of the child.

That this material is related to the Genesis 6.1-4 passage is quite 
obvious, but it is not so clear in which direction the 
relationship goes. Did the Genesis passage get expanded, or is it 
a summary of a much larger and older tradition? This story 
in various forms leaves traces in a large number of DSS scrolls and 
related material.  Much of the Enoch literature and Jubilees 
build on it and references to Nephilim, Watchers, and 
errant angels are also found in the Damascus Document and other 
DSS. It is a foundational tradition, an etiological tale 
answering various questions about "origins": why are there 
giants? whence esoteric knowledge? why is there sin?  Divine or 
otherworldly beings came down to humans to reveal such things and 
influence conduct. 

Who is the child being talked about in GenApocr? Noah, son of 
Lamech and Bitenosh, his wife (2.3). Note also how his wife 
refers to him as "my brother and lord" (2.9); interesting 
terminology similar to that found in the traditions of Abraham 
and Sarah. We know that brother-sister marriage was practiced in 
Egypt, at least among the ruling classes, and even when this 
might not have been literally true, brother-sister language 
might be used for married couples. Perhaps it was also used in 
other ancient Near Eastern contexts. 

Cols 3 - 11 are very fragmentary.  Noah is mentioned in col. 6 
and the ark col. 10. Then we have a less fragmentary column 12: 

Yavan is the father of the Greeks, as we already noted in the 
Nahum Commentary. Noah is said to have planted a huge vineyard on 
Mount Lubar that produced wine four years later, which accords 
with agricultural observations found also in rabbinic literature. 

Regarding the long life span attributed to Methuselah (369 
years) and other early figures, various explanations have been 
attempted: e.g. months were called "years," or every 6 months 
constituted a "year" (since in the Jewish calendar there are two 
cycles in a year, with corresponding new years days and initial 
high feasts), or the entire length of a "dynasty" was given as 
the lifetime of the founder (as in some ancient Near East records 
that have survived). No explanation is entirely satisfactory.

The damage is again severe until column 19 is reached, possibly 
because of the way the roll was exposed to destructive elements 
over the centuries. Sometimes important things can be learned 
from the patterns of damage. 

In col. 19, "sons of Ham" is a traditional generic reference to 
Egyptians (Ham was a son of Noah). Abraham seems to be the 
narrator at this point, as becomes obvious in line 14, concerning 
his dream. In line 25 he reads from a book, described as the 
words of Enoch. This is consistent with other accounts found 
in the Enoch materials, Jubilees, Testaments of the Patriarchs, 
etc. Sometimes reference is also made to the heavenly tablets, 
which contain all knowledge regarding history, science, 
individuals, etc. The angelic/heavenly beings sometimes reveal 
these secrets to people like Enoch. 

Cols. 20-22 are nearly complete. Note 2.8 concerning HRKNWS, who 
seems to be one of the three Egyptian informants who interviewed 
Abraham in col. 19. The name HRKNWS is reminiscent of the 
Hasmonean royal name Hyrkanos, although there does not seem to be 
any attempt to make such a connection in this text. Next comes 
the detailed description of Sarai's beauty, which serves as 
background for the desire of the Egyptian king to have her, and 
her protecting Abraham by claiming that he is her "brother." In 
such a text, we have gone far beyond what the biblical book of 
Genesis reports, and the questions remain concerning the 
relationship of our "para-biblical" works to the "biblical." Note 
that the technique is not that of a commentary -- no texts are 
quoted as the basis for explanation or elaboration.

Some other samples: 4Qbook of Giants (4Q530 [4QEnGiants ar] in 
GM 261f) has Ohyah, brother of Enoch, relating his dream in which 
"The power of the heavens came down to earth" (2.16). This may be 
a reference to Michael the archangel, who is described in some 
other traditions as the power of the Most High.  The Nephilim are 
also mentioned in this and the following fragment ("the Giants 
and the Nephilim" at the start of 4Q531; GM 262). 

In the "Elect of God" text (4Q534 = GM 263), we again hear of the 
Watchers, associated with some unnamed special agent of God who 
"knows the three books" and all the secrets of humankind!

Again, in the "Apocryphon of Jacob" (4Q537 = GM 265)
an angel delivers heavenly tablets to the human recipient, 
including information about cultic activities in the Temple.
All these different, but similar, texts come from different 
hands; one enigma of the DSS is that hundreds of 
"scribal" hands are represented, and the same hand is almost 
never responsible for more than one writing. It makes it 
difficult to visualize a community of scribes producing all 
this literature in one place, but not copying more than one text 
each.

Jin Kyu Kim (Westminster Seminary) 
//end//