The Ethiopian Woman

[b.finton]

* Num. 12:

1. And Miriam, and Aaron with her, spoke against Moses concerning the Cu****e wife he had taken, for he had taken a Cu****e wife.
2. And they said, "Is it but through Moses alone that the Lord has spoken? Has He not spoken to us as well?" And the Lord heard.

Some seem to argue that 'Cu****e' here refers to Zipporah and serves as an idiom meaning something akin to "strikingly unique." That seems like a stretch to me and, further, does little to render the pericope any less enigmatic. Any thoughts?

[* translation by Robert Alter]

As they say, the more vague the literal reference in Torah, the deeper the hidden truth.

When my spotty understanding of the Oral Tradition brings such a question to my attention, I look to the Sinaitic script for clues to hidden meanings, if I'm being diligent.

The first thing I do is look for both right- and left-hand readings of the word or verse in question:

http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.gif

(The woman) the Cu****e . . .

. . . illuminates (He) the Tree of Knowledge (Kaf) in order to bind (Waw) Wisdom (Shin) with activities (Yod).

. . . excites (He) the passions (Kaf) and (Waw) provokes (Shin) response (Yod).

Both of these parsings would explain grumblings among the people, by virtue of the work or the hubbub involved.

My view is that the Ethiopian woman is the Oral Tradition, itself-- the black text, the literal sense. Moses was schooled in all the arts of Egypt, which is why the Oral Tradition is also referred to as Zipporah (the bird), being capable of rising to much higher levels.

The purpose of this post is simply to demonstrate my approach, which goes on to examine the operation of numbers within a word or phrase.

b.

 

[Levite]

As they say, the more vague the literal reference in Torah, the deeper the hidden truth.

When my spotty understanding of the Oral Tradition brings such a question to my attention, I look to the Sinaitic script for clues to hidden meanings, if I'm being diligent.

The first thing I do is look for both right- and left-hand readings of the word or verse in question:

http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.gif

(The woman) the Cu****e . . .

. . . illuminates (He) the Tree of Knowledge (Kaf) in order to bind (Waw) Wisdom (Shin) with activities (Yod).

. . . excites (He) the passions (Kaf) and (Waw) provokes (Shin) response (Yod).

Both of these parsings would explain grumblings among the people, by virtue of the work or the hubbub involved.

My view is that the Ethiopian woman is the Oral Tradition, itself-- the black text, the literal sense. Moses was schooled in all the arts of Egypt, which is why the Oral Tradition is also referred to as Zipporah (the bird), being capable of rising to much higher levels.

The purpose of this post is simply to demonstrate my approach, which goes on to examine the operation of numbers within a word or phrase.

b.

1. You've got the word spelled backword there.
2. There is no apparent reason for using Paleo-Hebrew/Sinaitic characters rather than block script.
3. Your "parsings" of the letters do not appear to based upon anything at all.
4. Your...allegorical reading...also does not appear to be based upon anything at all.

Can you provide any precedents in scholarship, midrash, or Kabbalah to suggest why this...reading...should be given value?

 

[Clear]

Hi b.finton :

While I think it is fine if you are trying to read ANY early form of paleo-hebrew rather than using the later block script or national Hebrew which was eventually adopted by the Jews (a late invention in Israels history), I can’t really follow the rationale for ascribing discrete historical meaning to pictographic languages without having a great deal of discrete historical context to help us in that effort. You don't give a historical context to support your theory.

From a historical perspective, it seems more likely that the Jewish textual traditions describing this wife are more correct and that this first wife is the Ethiopian princess “Tharbis”.

For example, The Jewish Historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews Book II, ch 10) relates many traditions of Moses “youth” histories when Moses is serving as a General in Pharoahs armies.

In the history dealing with his marriage to the princess, Tharbis, Moses is preparing to conquer an Ethiopian city. A deal is struck between the Ethiopian King and the General Moses and, as part of the Treaty/agreement, Moses marries the Kings daughter Tharbis. There are other sources for parallels to this Jewish historical tradition that I have not read, however the history is quite detailed.

The biblical difficulty for Moses comes when the Isrealites are then prohibited from marrying outside of Isreal by the very person who has already married outside of Isreal. Thus, Aaron and Miriam may have, in this way, justified their criticism of Moses.

Without the additional history, Moses may be made to look like a hypocrite (since he appears to have broken the rule placed on Israel). However, With the additional history, Moses is relieved of the burden of hypocrisy and is seen to be subject to circumstances.

The Biblical account does not give us enough detail to tell specifically why Moses was being criticized by Aaron and Miriam. Was it for having married Tharbis in the first place?;, or for not having divorced Tharbis?, or for having taken Tharbis with him on Israels sojourn?, etc..... She is lost to biblical history at some point.

In any case, I hope your spiritual journey is good as you learn to form your beliefs.



Clear
תידר

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

1. You've got the word spelled backword there.
2. There is no apparent reason for using Paleo-Hebrew/Sinaitic characters rather than block script.
3. Your "parsings" of the letters do not appear to based upon anything at all.
4. Your...allegorical reading...also does not appear to be based upon anything at all.

Can you provide any precedents in scholarship, midrash, or Kabbalah to suggest why this...reading...should be given value?

1. No surprise there, but such fundamenral ignorance is unlikely to dissuade him from explaining out text to us.
2. Of course there is. It looks impressive and supplies the facade of intellectual superiority and competency.
3. Hubris?
4. (Don't get me started.)

 

[b.finton]

Literalisms snag thought and plunge discussion into controversy at any level of understanding. A wife to a literal Moses? If any should insist; but then Torah becomes not the pleasant woman who smiles an invitation as she turns away, but something of a shrew with unruly daughters.

I wanted to answer Jay's question, best I could. Because it was originally posted in the Jewish forum, I understood he was asking experts. I manhandled it over to this board to avoid as much hubbub as possible.

An aside to Levite:
http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.gif isn't the correct order of letters. Sorry. Spelled from memory, and not my first language. I'll check the book next time.

b.

 

[rosends]

Literalisms snag thought and plunge discussion into controversy at any level of understanding. A wife to a literal Moses? If any should insist; but then Torah becomes not the pleasant woman who smiles an invitation as she turns away, but something of a shrew with unruly daughters.

I wanted to answer Jay's question, best I could. Because it was originally posted in the Jewish forum, I understood he was asking experts. I manhandled it over to this board to avoid as much hubbub as possible.

An aside to Levite:
http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.gif isn't the correct order of letters. Sorry. Spelled from memory, and not my first language. I'll check the book next time.

b.

the letters look right to me (though the shape of the middle letter isn't exactly as I have learned it).

 

[Levite]

For honest clarification: I reloaded the page and the letters ended up in the correct order, so I assume the issue was technical, not a spelling error.

 

[b.finton]

the Ku****e:

http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.2.gif

b.

 

[rosends]

the Ku****e:

http://crowndiamond.org/cd/Resources/Cu****e.2.gif

b.

the two spellings present two possible letterings: (starting in Hebrew)

הכושת
vs
הכשית

the first is H-K-V-SH-T

and the second is

H-K-SH-Y-T

the U vowel sound can be made by either a particular vowel UNDER the K or a form of the V.

 

[Ingledsva]

I read somewhere that Zipporah, his Midianite wife (Exodus 2.15-22) a descendant of Abraham, was the Cu****e woman being discussed.

They noted that Midianites were scattered all over the lands south of Canaan, and the tribal name of the Sinai Midianites was Cushan (Habakkuk 3.7 "I saw the tents of Cushan in affliction and the curtains of the land of Midian did tremble".)

They think by an early copyist's mistake Cushan was turned into Cush by the omission of the final N, or perhaps the people of Cushan were referred to as Cu****es.

Miriam and Aaron may have been pointing out that she was not full blooded; and showing their own fears that one of Moses' own sons by Zipporah would be appointed by him to succeed him as Israel's leader when the time came.

What I personally find interesting is that her name goes to OWL. And we are told Moses wore horns. The Owl and horned wild man were a Pagan pair, and a Temple to Pan the horned God has been unearthed in Israel. Perhaps the worry of Miriam and Aaron was a return to Pagan worship.

*

 

[Clear]

Ingleddva said : " Miriam and Aaron may have been pointing out that she was not full blooded; and showing their own fears that one of Moses' own sons by Zipporah would be appointed by him to succeed him as Israel's leader when the time came."

Really good thinking Ingledsva, I had never considered this possibility. Very interesting thought.

Clear

 

[Ingledsva]

Ingleddva said : " Miriam and Aaron may have been pointing out that she was not full blooded; and showing their own fears that one of Moses' own sons by Zipporah would be appointed by him to succeed him as Israel's leader when the time came."

Really good thinking Ingledsva, I had never considered this possibility. Very interesting thought.

Clear

And note that just before this, Moses says he can't handle the pressure.

Num 11:13 Whence should I have flesh to give unto all this people? for they weep unto me, saying, Give us flesh, that we may eat.

Num 11:14 I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me.

Num 11:15 And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in thy sight; and let me not see my wretchedness.

This would make Miriam and Aaron worried about whom would take over for Moses, - for remember, his Father-in-Law had brought Zipporah and the sons to Moses.

*

 

[Tumah]

What I personally find interesting is that her name goes to OWL. And we are told Moses wore horns. The Owl and horned wild man were a Pagan pair, and a Temple to Pan the horned God has been unearthed in Israel. Perhaps the worry of Miriam and Aaron was a return to Pagan worship.

*

As far as I know, tzipor (the root of Ziporrah) in Biblical Hebrew is just the generic word for bird as in
Deut. 14:11-12
11. Every tzipor [that is] pure, you [may] eat.
12. And this, which you may not eat from them, the NeSHeR, the PeReS and the 'aZNiYaH.

If you translate the word "tzipor" as "bird" then verse 12 and the next 6 verses are all listing exceptions to the rule in verse 11. "From them" being from the birds.
If you translate the word "tzipor" as "owl", then verse 12 through 18 is a listing of 21 species of owls. Unprecedented I think, although not strictly impossible.

Also, the "horns" of Moses is a misinterpretation. It should call to mind rays of light, not horns. As in Hab. 3:4, where the same word is used. In context of the verse it also makes more sense: (Ex. 34:30)
"and behold, the skin of his face was radiant"
"and behold, the skin of his face was horned"

 

[Ingledsva]

As far as I know, tzipor (the root of Ziporrah) in Biblical Hebrew is just the generic word for bird as in
Deut. 14:11-12
11. Every tzipor [that is] pure, you [may] eat.
12. And this, which you may not eat from them, the NeSHeR, the PeReS and the 'aZNiYaH.

If you translate the word "tzipor" as "bird" then verse 12 and the next 6 verses are all listing exceptions to the rule in verse 11. "From them" being from the birds.
If you translate the word "tzipor" as "owl", then verse 12 through 18 is a listing of 21 species of owls. Unprecedented I think, although not strictly impossible.

Also, the "horns" of Moses is a misinterpretation. It should call to mind rays of light, not horns. As in Hab. 3:4, where the same word is used. In context of the verse it also makes more sense: (Ex. 34:30)
"and behold, the skin of his face was radiant"
"and behold, the skin of his face was horned"

You know there is still debate over the "horns."

It is generally accepted that The verb qaran is from qeren = horn.

The verbal form is - maqrin - found in Psalm 69:31/32 means - to grow horns.

Aquila, a second century Jew, translates Exo 34:29 as "the skin of his face grew horns."

Do I think he grew horns? No, obviously not. I think he put on a horned headdress showing he was accepted/glorified, in a very ancient tradition.

And by the way - these horns have always been associated to sun rays, and as has been shown before - we actually have a Sun and Storm God.

The earliest art shows him wearing a horned headdress. Also why would he vail a glowing face? Why would a glowing face frighten the people?

*

I will get back to you on the OWL material - as I have to look for my paper. However, we actually see the Owl and Satyr in several places in the Bible.

Such as -

Isaiah 34:14 - The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall call to his mate the screech owl (Lilith,) and she also shall find for herself a place of rest.

The Owl Goddess and the Satyr are found together in multiple religions.

And a Temple Complex to Pan the Horned God, has been uncovered in Northern Israel.

*

 

[rosends]

You know there is still debate over the "horns."

It is generally accepted that The verb qaran is from qeren = horn.

The verbal form is - maqrin - found in Psalm 69:31/32 means - to grow horns.

Aquila, a second century Jew, translates Exo 34:29 as "the skin of his face grew horns."

Do I think he grew horns? No, obviously not. I think he put on a horned headdress showing he was accepted/glorified, in a very ancient tradition.

And by the way - these horns have always been associated to sun rays, and as has been shown before - we actually have a Sun and Storm God.

The earliest art shows him wearing a horned headdress. Also why would he vail a glowing face? Why would a glowing face frighten the people?

*

I will get back to you on the OWL material - as I have to look for my paper. However, we actually see the Owl and Satyr in several places in the Bible.

Such as -

Isaiah 34:14 - The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall call to his mate the screech owl (Lilith,) and she also shall find for herself a place of rest.

The Owl Goddess and the Satyr are found together in multiple religions.

And a Temple Complex to Pan the Horned God, has been uncovered in Northern Israel.

*

Onkelos, whom some think is the same as Aquila, wrote (in approx 110 CE) on 34:29 and 30, ziv, "glowing" for the Hebrew Karan (not Keren). Both words come from the same root meaning "offshoot".

כט וַהֲוָה, כַּד נְחַת מֹשֶׁה מִטּוּרָא דְּסִינַי, וּתְרֵין לוּחֵי דְּסָהֲדוּתָא בִּידָא דְּמֹשֶׁה, בְּמֵיחֲתֵיהּ מִן טוּרָא; וּמֹשֶׁה לָא יְדַע, אֲרֵי סְגִי זִיו יְקָרָא דְּאַפּוֹהִי--בְּמַלָּלוּתֵיהּ עִמֵּיהּ. ל וַחֲזָא אַהֲרוֹן וְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, יָת מֹשֶׁה, וְהָא סְגִי, זִיו יְקָרָא דְּאַפּוֹהִי; וּדְחִילוּ, מִלְּאִתְקָרָבָא לְוָתֵיהּ

 

[Ingledsva]

Onkelos, whom some think is the same as Aquila, wrote (in approx 110 CE) on 34:29 and 30, ziv, "glowing" for the Hebrew Karan (not Keren). Both words come from the same root meaning "offshoot".

כט וַהֲוָה, כַּד נְחַת מֹשֶׁה מִטּוּרָא דְּסִינַי, וּתְרֵין לוּחֵי דְּסָהֲדוּתָא בִּידָא דְּמֹשֶׁה, בְּמֵיחֲתֵיהּ מִן טוּרָא; וּמֹשֶׁה לָא יְדַע, אֲרֵי סְגִי זִיו יְקָרָא דְּאַפּוֹהִי--בְּמַלָּלוּתֵיהּ עִמֵּיהּ. ל וַחֲזָא אַהֲרוֹן וְכָל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, יָת מֹשֶׁה, וְהָא סְגִי, זִיו יְקָרָא דְּאַפּוֹהִי; וּדְחִילוּ, מִלְּאִתְקָרָבָא לְוָתֵיהּ

They wrote different translations - so obviously different.

*

 

[rosends]

They wrote different translations - so obviously different.

*

do you have a source of the Aquila reference so I can read it? Into what language was it translated?

 

[Tumah]

You know there is still debate over the "horns."

It is generally accepted that The verb qaran is from qeren = horn.

The verbal form is - maqrin - found in Psalm 69:31/32 means - to grow horns.

Aquila, a second century Jew, translates Exo 34:29 as "the skin of his face grew horns."

Do I think he grew horns? No, obviously not. I think he put on a horned headdress showing he was accepted/glorified, in a very ancient tradition.

And by the way - these horns have always been associated to sun rays, and as has been shown before - we actually have a Sun and Storm God.

The earliest art shows him wearing a horned headdress. Also why would he vail a glowing face? Why would a glowing face frighten the people?

The word "to [grow] horn" and "to radiate" is the same word in Hebrew. The describe the same action: an extension out of base. Its up to the context to determine the material that is extending. Moses had just spent 40 days and nights in Heaven with G-d (so to speak). Midrashic sources aside, in context it seems more likely that some of G-d's light (Psa. 36:10) may have rubbed off on him, than that he spontaneously grew horns for no apparent reason.
It doesn't say that he put on a horned mask. It actually says "his skin horned/radiated" And it also wouldn't make sense considering the verse later states that he put on a mask to cover the horning/radiation.
The reason he would veil a radiant face, is because if the light was divine, then it would have been an awe-some light.

I will get back to you on the OWL material - as I have to look for my paper. However, we actually see the Owl and Satyr in several places in the Bible.

Such as -

Isaiah 34:14 - The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall call to his mate the screech owl (Lilith,) and she also shall find for herself a place of rest.

The Owl Goddess and the Satyr are found together in multiple religions.

And a Temple Complex to Pan the Horned God, has been uncovered in Northern Israel.

*

My Books says
"And the TZI will meet the Ee (don't know what tzee or ee are and too lazy to look it up), and the satyr will call to his friend. However, there Lilith rests and found for herself a resting place."
I don't see any other instance of the word "Lilith" in the entirety of the Jewish Scriptures. So I'm not sure on what basis or context you are translating it as "screech owl." The verse also is not calling Lilith the mate of the satyr as the word "his friend/mate" is written in the masculine and the word "Lilith" is feminine. So its saying that the satyr will call to other satyrs.

I'm not saying idol-worship didn't exist in Israel. The Books of the Jewish Scriptures are full of cases of the prophets trying to get the people away from it. I'm just saying that you are reading a bit too much into the verses.

 

[b.finton]

2. There is no apparent reason for using Paleo-Hebrew/Sinaitic characters rather than block script.
3. Your "parsings" of the letters do not appear to based upon anything at all.

Hebrew Alphabet | Rabbi Ginsburgh taught symbolic meanings of the block script. The script itself, and therefore its symbolism, is rooted in the Sinaitic script, which was in common use among many peoples when Torah was written.

An effect of Ezra's script is that the writings with which he was entrusted and those that followed were less accessible to the nations. What was elegant to the initiated became veiled and vestigial to those without-- the writings, themselves, and also the whirling symbolisms of their letters in combination.

The question to those who belittle the original is why? Especially as some comments belied ignorance of their shapes? If the block script has symbolism and meanings beyond mere sound, why not fully investigate the basis of those elements of the alefbet?

Bet HaShem Midrash is a prominent proponent of the Mesha Script.

I've heard the Paleo letters called "chicken scratches." Scratches in the rock.

b.

 

[Levite]

Hebrew Alphabet | Rabbi Ginsburgh taught symbolic meanings of the block script. The script itself, and therefore its symbolism, is rooted in the Sinaitic script, which was in common use among many peoples when Torah was written.

An effect of Ezra's script is that the writings with which he was entrusted and those that followed were less accessible to the nations. What was elegant to the initiated became veiled and vestigial to those without-- the writings, themselves, and also the whirling symbolisms of their letters in combination.

The question to those who belittle the original is why? Especially as some comments belied ignorance of their shapes? If the block script has symbolism and meanings beyond mere sound, why not fully investigate the basis of those elements of the alefbet?

Bet HaShem Midrash is a prominent proponent of the Mesha Script.

I've heard the Paleo letters called "chicken scratches." Scratches in the rock.

b.

Using Paleo-Hebrew letters will not magically turn Judaizing Christian teachings into actual Jewish teachings.

We do make some use of the symbolism of the letters in Kabbalah, and the symbolism is generally quite different from what you are apparently using. We do so rarely if ever in mainstream midrash aggadah, and not at all in midrash halachah.

As far as actual Hebrew scholarship and Jewish midrash of Jewish scripture, what you are posting Jason authentic precedent or support. If you're claiming it as an original interpretation, fine; but it's not exegetically supported in any traditional Jewish fashion.