31461861

7/30/2019 31461861

1/35

Te Community Hymns Classification:A Proposal for Further Differentiation*

Angela Kim HarkinsFairfield University

AbstractTe hodayot scroll from Cave 1 is often cited as one of the classic examples ofsectarian literature found at Qumran, yet this conceptualization ignores the greatvariety of language and style found throughout these compositions. Perhaps arefined understanding of the different literary types within the hodayot scroll canhelp lead scholars to a better understanding of the relationship between it andother writings from Qumran. Tis paper proposes that the specific group of hod-ayot known as the Community Hymns may be further differentiated into two

types: those that show strong alignment with the yah

adand those that do notshow strong alignment.

KeywordsHodayot; Community Hymns; sectarian literature

In this paper, I propose that the literary category of the CommunityHymns may be further differentiated into two groups: those that show

strong alignment with the eacher Hymns and the community of theyahad, and those that show no such signs. Tis latter group may possiblybe pre-sectarian. For this evaluation, I will apply the various criteria thatscholars have proposed for determining sectarian provenance to the Com-munity Hymns and consider them in light of the features present in theCommunity Rule. Further differentiation of the Community Hymns may

* As one might expect in discussions concerning the hodayot, talk of theCommunity Hymns means that talk of the eacher cannot be far behind. It isa pleasure to honor a very special teacher, Jim VanderKam, on his sixtiethbirthday.

Dead Sea Discoveries 15 (2008) 121154 www.brill.nl/dsd

7/30/2019 31461861

2/35

122 A. K. Harkins / Dead Sea Discoveries 15 (2008) 121154

also help us to refine our understanding of the relationship between thehodayot and other texts.1

Preliminary Remarks about the Community of the CommunityHymns

Serious discussion of the relationship of the hodayot texts to their commu-nity context has begun to take place in recent scholarship.2 Early on,scholars identified at least two literary groupings in the collection knownfrom 1QHa: the eacher Hymns and the Community Hymns.3 Bothmonikers are suggestive rather than instantiated since the eacher Hymns

1 In this article, the term hodayot will serve as a generic reference and thuswill not be capitalized. References to the specific collection from Cave 1 will bedesignated as either 1QHaor 1QHodayota.

2 Te best example of this kind of work is C.A. Newsom, Te Self as SymbolicSpace: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran (SDJ 52; Leiden:

E.J. Brill, 2004). In this fine study, she asks the important question of functionhow were the hodayot used rhetorically by the community in the formation ofgroup identity? She also raises many important challenges to the traditional his-torical-critical inquiry into these texts.

3 For the sake of convenience, the labels of eacher Hymns and CommunityHymns will be used as terms pointing to literary types; however, the use of theseterms should not be mistaken as conclusions about their authorial identity. Tenumbering of the columns and lines of 1QHa will follow the reconstruction pro-posed by H. Stegemann, Rekonstruktion der Hodajot: Ursprngliche Gestalt und

kritisch bearbeiteter ext der Hymnenrolle aus Hhle 1 von Qumran (University ofHeidelberg Ph.D. Dissertation: Heidelberg, 1963) and published in Te MaterialReconstruction of 1QHodayot, Te Dead Sea Scrolls: Fifty Years after theirDiscovery. Proceedings of the Jerusalem Congress, July 2025, 1997 (eds L.H.Schiffman, E. ov, J.C. VanderKam, exec. ed. G. Marquis; Jerusalem: IES incooperation with Te Shrine of the Book, 2000) 27284. Tis was indepen-dently achieved by . Puech, in Quelques aspects de la restauration du rouleaudes hymnes (1QH), JJS 39 (1988) 3855. Stegemanns and Puechs columnnumbering is used in the more widely accessible edition by F. Garca Martnezand E.J.C. igchelaar (Te Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition [2 vols; Leiden: E.J.

Brill/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997] 1.147203) but differs by a few withrespect to the line numbering.

7/30/2019 31461861

3/35

A. K. Harkins / Dead Sea Discoveries 15 (2008) 121154 123

fail to mention the eacher explicitly4 and not all of the CommunityHymns speak explicitly about communal experiences.5 Te question of

authorship is a troublesome one for these poetic texts.6 More recent schol-arship has challenged long-standing assumptions about the authorship of

4 Because the hodayot are written from a first person perspective, it is not sur-prising that the speaker does not refer to himself by name.

5 See the study of the location of the limited references to communal contextsin the Community Hymns by A.K. Harkins, Observations on the EditorialShaping of the So-called Community Hymns from 1QHa and 4QHa (4Q427),

DSD12 (2005) 24356.6 Te authorial identification of the speaker of the some of the hodayot as theeacher of Righteousness was first suggested by Sukenik who associated the figurewith other texts like the Damascus Document and 1QpHab. See his comments in

: ( Jerusalem:Bialik, 1948) 22 (Heb.) and Te Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University (ed.N. Avigad; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1954 [Heb.]; 1955 [Eng.]) 39 (Eng.). Tiswas echoed, as well, in the early study by G.S. Glanzman, Sectarian Psalms fromthe Dead Sea, Teological Studies13 (1952) 487524, esp. 490. Tis positionwas developed more fully by scholars in the period following Sukenik. See

G. Morawe who associates the author of the form Tanksgiving Songs with theeacher of Righteousness in Aufbau und Abgrenzung der Loblieder von Qumrn:Studien zur gattungsgeschichtlichen Einordnung der Hodajth (Berlin: EvangelischeVerlagsanstalt, 1961); a refinement of Morawes study was conducted by G. Jere-mias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUN 2; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup-recht, 1963) 17677, who correlated the events described in the hodayot withthe eacher known from 1QpHab (this was also examined by P.R. Davies butwith differing results in his Behind the Essenes: History and Ideology in the DeadSea Scrolls [BJS 94; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987] 87105); in that same year

J. Becker, following the work of Morawe, also took the eacher of Righteousnessto be the author of the Tanksgiving Songs, in Das Heil Gottes: Heils- und Snden-begriffe in den Qumrantexten und im Neuen estament(SUN 3; Gttingen: Van-denhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964) 50. Many scholars from this early period ofQumran Scrolls scholarship echoed this view: J.P. Hyatt, Te View of Man inthe Qumran Hodayot, NS 2 (195556) 277; W.H. Brownlee, MessianicMotifs of Qumran and the New estament, NS3 (1956) 1230; M. Delcor,Les hymnes de Qumrn (Hodayot): texte hbreu, introduction, traduction, commentaire(Autour de la Bible; Paris: Letouzey et An, 1962) 22; and E.H. Merrill, Qumranand Predestination: A Teological Study of the Tanksgiving Hymns (SDJ 8;

Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1975). Tey have also sought to demonstrate it through othermeans; see M.C. Douglas, Power and Praise in the Hodayot: A Literary Critical

7/30/2019 31461861

4/35


these hymns, moving toward the question of their reception by and func-tion within the ancient community.7 In her study on the hodayot, Carol

Newsom points out the problems associated with the question of author-ship in the following way:

But what about the other widespread assumption that these composi-tions are to be understood as representing the persona of the eacherof Righteousness? Tat is a much trickier question than I think it isgenerally taken to be. I wish to subject it to some scrutiny and to setalongside it a modified form of an old alternative suggestion, that theI in this group of compositions represents the persona of the cur-

rent leader of the community, perhaps the Mebaqqer rather than thehistorical eacher. Another way to put this suggestion is to say thatthese Hodayot articulate a leadership myth that was appropriated bythe current leader in much the same fashion that the ordinary mem-ber identified with the I of the so-called Hodayot of the commu-nity. Ultimately, I do not think that the evidence exists either todisprove the hypothesis about the eacher of Righteousness or toprove the alternative. It is important, however, to loosen the grip thatthis hypothesis about the eacher of Righteousness has had on our

scholarly imaginations.8

Newsoms work on the hodayot rightly challenges the traditional identificationof the eacher Hymns with the eacher of Righteousness.9 She even goes

Study of 1QH 9:118:14(University of Chicago Ph.D. Dissertation: Chicago, IL,1998). Te essential elements of Douglass study are available in Te eacherHymn Hypothesis Revisited: New Data for an Old Crux, DSD6 (1999) 23966.

7 Te effect of the repeated recitation of the hodayot upon the readers was

noted by H. Bardtke, Considrations sur les Cantiques de Qumrn, RB 63(1956) 231; Newsom discusses this communal effect in her essay, KennethBurke Meets the eacher of Righteousness: Rhetorical Strategies in the Hodayotand the Serek Ha-Yahad, Of Scribes and Qumran Scrolls: Studies on the HebrewBible, Intertestamental Judaism, and Christian Origins presented to John Strugnellon the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday(eds H.W. Attridge, J.J. Collins, and .H.obin; College Teology Society Resources in Religion 5; New York: UniversityPress of America, 1990) 12131, and in her more recent work, Self as SymbolicSpace, 287300.

8 Newsom, Self as Symbolic Space, 288.9 Newsom was not the first to express doubts about the positive identification

of the author of the eacher Hymns. Other skeptics include J. Licht, who was

7/30/2019 31461861

5/35


so far as to refer to them as the Hodayot of the leader to avoid the asso-ciations that the name eacher Hymns has with the eacher of Righ-

teousness.10 Her critique is important because it underscores the deeplyproblematic nature of traditional historical inquiry into these poetic com-positions and the assumptions that scholars often make between texts andthe communities that gave rise to them.11

Te assumed relationship between the material traditionally known asthe Community Hymns and the community of the yahad is one that

the first to suggest that the hymns may be linked to one of the other leadership

offices in the community, the mebaqqeror the maskil, in Te Tanksgiving Scroll:A Scroll from the Wilderness of Judaea( Jerusalem: Bialik, 1957) 2226 (Heb.);S. Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot: Psalms from Qumran (ADan 2; Aarhus: Universitets-forlaget, 1960) 31631; D. Dombkowski Hopkins, Te Qumran Communityand 1Q Hodayot: A Reassessment, RevQ10 (1981) 32364. It should be noted,however, that while Newsom challenges the authorial identification of theeacher Hymns, she questions the sectarian identification of neither the eacherHymns nor of the entire scroll. Skepticism about the authorship of the eacherHymns material is also expressed by J.A. Hughes, Scriptural Allusions and Exegesisin the Hodayot (SDJ 59; Leiden: Brill, 2006) who presents her own work in

light of Newsoms study but draws the conclusion that the categories of eacherand Community Hymns are inadequate (228). Hughess study, however, doesnot engage the form-critical aspects of these categories in the same way as previ-ous studies and also does not include a sufficient number of non-eacher Hymnsin her sample of hodayot. Discussions of authorship in the second temple periodtoday should consult the important study by H. Najman, Seconding Sinai: TeDevelopment of Mosaic Discourse in Second emple Judaism ( JSJSup 77; Leiden:E.J. Brill, 2003) esp. 140. Najman offers a different way of conceptualizing thetraditional historical-critical idea of authorship, which oftentimes leads to a prob-

lematic understanding of pseudonymous rewriting in antiquity. Instead, it is bet-ter to think of authorship and pseudonymous writing during this time as adiscourse tied inextricably to an authoritative figure.

10 Te power of the eacher Hypothesis is perhaps reflected in part by theconclusion Hughes draws that some compositions in 1QHa are neither eachernor Community Hymns but representative examples of a sectarian class exercisein poetic interpretation, Scriptural Allusions and Exegesis, 233. Hughess imag-ined scenario of a class exercise is driven more by the hodayots long associationwith teacher taxonomy than actual indicators in the texts themselves; see thereview of this book by A.K. Harkins inJSJ38 (2007) 39899.

11 See Newsoms discussion of the traditional historical-critical studies on andconclusions about the hodayot in Self as Symbolic Space, 286346.

7/30/2019 31461861

6/35


relies upon an assumption about the authorship of these texts. Newsomswork is particularly relevant for this inquiry because it raises issues about

the strong power terminological labels hold on scholarly imaginations. Teliterary categories of eacher Hymns and Community Hymns were intro-duced by Heinz-Wolfgang Kuhn early in the scholarship on the scroll1QHa as replacements for the two categories, Tanksgiving Hymns andHymnic Songs of Confession, that had been used by Gnther Morawe.12Kuhn writes that the I in the non-eacher Hymns always refers gener-ally to the Qumran Community and not the specific experiences of anindividual.13 Tus, Kuhns categories were thought to be an improvementon the more generic categories first used by hodayot scholars. Te label ofthe eacher Hymns assumes an authorial relationship between the textsand the historical figure of the eacher of Righteousness known from otherQumran texts. In an analogous way, there is an assumption that the Com-munityHymns were authored by a community, one often assumed to bethe same as, or similar to, the social and religious group of the eacherHymns, namely the yahad. Te Community Hymns relationship to theeacher Hymns is presumed by many based on the specific collection ofhodayot from Cave 1 which presents them together; but what if our first

encounter with the hodayot had been with 4Q427, a scroll that has noeacher Hymns material? Te point was well stated by Moshe Bernsteinin 1994:

What would have been the result had the Qumran texts been discov-ered and published in a different order than they were? Te signi-ficance of the sequence of publication of the Qumran documents is aphenomenon which, I believe, has generally been overlooked.14

12

H.-W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und gegenwrtiges Heil: Untersuchungen zu denGemeindeliedern von Qumran mit einem Anhang ber Eschatologie und Gegenwart inder Verkndigung Jesu (SUN 4; Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966)2425; Morawe,Aufbau und Abgrenzung, 21106.

13 He writes, Im Unterschied zu den Lehrerliedern werden die Bekenntnis-lieder in der Arbeit auch einfach als Gemeindelieder bezeichnet, da sich dieBeter aller individuellen Anliegen enthalten, ihr Ich also nie biographisch ist,sondern sich stets auf den Qumranfrommen berhaupt bezieht, in Enderwar-tung und gegenwrtiges Heil, 2425.

14 See M. Bernstein, Introductory Formulas for Citation and Re-Citation ofBiblical Verses in the Qumran Pesharim: Observations on a Pesher echnique,DSD1 (1994) 30.

7/30/2019 31461861

7/35


One can only imagine how differently we might view the CommunityHymns if the Cave 4 materials had been published before 1QHa, particu-

larly since the most complete scroll from that collection, 4Q427, containsonly Community Hymns and in a different order and arrangement from1QHa.15

Te complexity of the Community Hymns collection was noted byearly scholars. Te texts within this grouping did not consistently exhibitthe same literary features and formal criteria that were observed in theeacher Hymns. In one of the early form-critical studies of these texts,Kuhn narrows down the seven formal elements identified by Morawe tothree primary ones: soteriological confessions, Niedrigkeitsdoxologie, andElendsbetrachtungen.16 More than two decades later, Sarah anzer dis-cussed how the category of the Community Hymns was in need of fur-ther consideration. She writes:

Finally, while it is not my primary purpose to scrutinize these alreadyexisting categories of Hodayot, I will suggest some refinements forboth the Hymns of the eacher and the Hymns of the Community.Kuhn himself provides the inspiration for this in his study, whichcarefully notes that the Hymns of the Community form a less than

homogenous group of compositions. Few of those Hodayot includeall of the distinctive features that characterize the Hymns of the Com-munity. Some are decidedly more explicit in their references to a com-munity or a specific elect group. One will eventually need to address

15 Te scroll 4Q427 is dated to approximately 10050 BCE on the basis ofpaleography. Schuller writes, Strugnell favours a date of about 7550 BCE,while Cross prefers a slightly later date 25 BCE plus or minus twenty-five years.

Here Schuller cites a private correspondence with F.M. Cross in November 1997as the source for his proposed dating of this hand. J. Starcky proposed a date of100 BCE, in Les quatre tapes du Messianisme, RB70 (1963) 483 n. 8; seeE. Schuller, Qumran Cave 4. XX. Poetical and Liturgical exts, Part 2 (ed. E.G.Chazon et al., in consultation with J. VanderKam and M. Brady; DJD 29;Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999) 85 n. 14. Te hand of 1QHa is early Herodianand dated to approximately 301 BCE. See Cross, Te Development of the

Jewish Scripts, Te Bible and the Ancient Near East (ed. G.E. Wright; GardenCity: Doubleday, 1961) 137.

16 Kuhn, Enderwartung und gegenwrtiges Heil, 2633. Kuhn also speaks aboutan additional element that is consistent among the non-eacher Hymns, but itdoes not participate in a common theme as these other three elements (29).

7/30/2019 31461861

8/35


the issue of whether such a large and diverse set of compositionsshould appropriately be grouped under the heading Te Hymns of the

Community.17

One of the important conclusions from anzers study is that wisdom ele-ments were not present consistently throughout the Community Hymns.18Tis lack of literary uniformity is true in general for the entire collection.Unlike the eacher Hymns, which have been identified as a unified anddistinct literary group,19 the Community Hymns have always been notedas diverse. Prior to the more unifying term Community Hymns, these

17 S.J. anzer, Te Sages at Qumran: Wisdom in the Hodayot (Ph.D. disserta-tion, Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, 1987) 22. One of the importantrefinements that she makes is that there are two types of Community Hymns, theDeuteronomic Hodayot and the Niedrigkeitsdoxologie Hodayot, 14149.

18 She notes also that wisdom elements were consistently absent from the tra-ditionally identified eacher Hymns, in Sages at Qumran, 75; cf. M.J. Goff,Reading Wisdom at Qumran: 4QInstruction and the Hodayot, DSD11 (2004)26388, which identifies points of contact between the sapiential text 4QInstruc-

tion and the eacher Hymns.19 Te identification of the eacher Hymns as a distinct literary category

within the hodayot was established early on in the scholarship on these texts andhas been demonstrated by several scholars independently. Te first to identifythis category was Holm-Nielsen who isolated a category of Tanksgiving Songsapart from Hymns, Hodayot. Tese same Tanksgiving Songs were identifiedindependently as a distinct literary category by Morawe,Aufbau und Abgrenzung,3133. Te theory of a literary unity to the hymns associated with the eacherwas most recently reexamined by M. Douglas, first in his dissertation Power and

Praise in the Hodayot, and later in article form in Te eacher Hymn HypothesisRevisited (see n. 6). One of Douglass significant conclusions is that the core ofthe eacher Hymns material is independent from the other hymns associatedwith the hodayot (see Douglas, Power and Praise in the Hodayot, 352). He pro-poses that there is a eachers Book, complete with an introduction and a con-clusion. Te creation hymn in col. 9 establishes an interpretive framework for thefollowing seven columns of eacher Hymns and the hymn in col. 18 functionedas the conclusion (2335). Earlier studies had proposed a literary unity to theeacher Hymns collection but had not considered the framing composition incol. 9:110:4 to belong with it; see Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit; Becker,Das Heil Gottes; Kuhn, Enderwartung und gegenwrtiges Heil; cf. Puech, La croy-ance, 33638.

7/30/2019 31461861

9/35


texts had also been known as both hymns and didactic psalms.20 Tisdiversity may be observed on a formal level when we compare the kinds

of incipits that appear throughout the Cave 1 scroll. While the eacherHymns consistently use the language of I give thanks to you ( ),the two sections of Community Hymns that appear before and afterthe eacher Hymns material use both formulae I give thanks to you( / ), and blessed are you ( ). In fact, Stegemannidentifies or reconstructs at least eleven instances of the incipit blessed areyou ( ), in the Community Hymns.21 It is also the case that theeacher Hymns consistently use the first person singular while the Com-munity Hymns include some compositions that use the first person plural.22

20 Jeremias writes that the non-eacher Hymns material was characterized bystereotypical language and monotonous repetitions; see Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit,175. anzer rightly critiques the earlier studies by Morawe, Kuhn, and Jeremiasfor harmonizing the obvious variation throughout the non-eacher Hymns mate-rial; see Sages at Qumran, 14344.

21 Stegemann writes, My analysis above suggests that there were at leasteleven sections introduced by in the preserved text of 1QHa: IV 21, 29,38 (17:9, 17, 26); V 15 (frg. 15 I 6); VI 19 (14:8); VIII 26 (16:8); XVIII 16

(10:14); XIX 30, 32, 35 (11:27, 29, 32); and XXII 34 (frg. 4 15) (cf. below,Appendix 4a). No section of the psalms within IX 1XVII 36 (1:19:36) is intro-duced in this way. Even the term is missing from that part of the scroll! SeeTe Number of Psalms in 1QHodayota and Some of Teir Sections, LiturgicalPerspectives: Prayer and Poetry in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls (ed. E.G. Chazonwith the collaboration of R.A. Clements and A. Pinnick; SDJ 48; Leiden: E.J.Brill, 2003) 191234, esp. 222. Note, however, that this quote is slightly mis-leading since the scribe has placed deletion marks around the in 1QHa13:22 and inserted here.

22

While rare for the scroll as a whole, the we-hymns never appear in theeacher Hymns collection. Tese unusual we-hymns appear to be locatedaround certain LeMaskilheadings in the Community Hymns. Te version of thehymn that is reconstructed in 1QHa 2526 is found with first person pluralforms in 4Q427 (see Schuller, DJD 29.96108). For a discussion of the locationof the we-hymns see Harkins, Observations on the Editorial Shaping,23356; yet cf. J.J. Collinss statement: Te Psalms of the Community are writ-ten in the first person, just like the eacher Psalms, and they include no calls tobystanders to join in praise nor speech in plural form, in Amazing Grace: Teransformation of the Tanksgiving Hymn at Qumran, Psalms in Community:

Jewish and Christian extual, Liturgical, and Artistic raditions(eds H.W. Attridgeand M.E. Fassler; SBLSS 25; Atlanta: SBL, 2003) 7585, here 81.

7/30/2019 31461861

10/35


Other notable inconsistencies within the Community Hymns are theappearance of compositions that make extraordinary claims like the much

discussed so-called Self-Glorification hymn23 and the striking hymn of

23 Many scholars have commented on the unusual nature of the Self-Glorification Hymn known best from the text preserved in frag. 7 of 4Q427.Te term itself was coined by E. Eshel in 4Q471b: A Self-Glorification Hymn,RevQ17 (1996) 176203; see also Eshel, Te Identification of the Speaker ofthe Self-Glorification Hymn, Te Provo International Conference on the Dead SeaScrolls: New exts, Reformulated Issues, and echnological Innovations (eds D.W.

Parry and E.C. Ulrich; SDJ 30; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1999) 61935; and Eshel, DJD29.42132.Studies on this interesting text should begin with those that discuss the con-

tested relationship of the hymn in 4Q491 with the War Scroll. For a discussionof this, see the important essay by F. Garca Martnez, Old exts and ModernMirages: Te I of wo Qumran Hymns, EL 78 (2002) 32139. Te earlystudies of this hymn include M. Smith, Ascent to the Heavens and Deificationin 4QMa, Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls( JSPSup 8; ed. L.H.Schiffman; Sheffield, JSO Press, 1990) 18188; Smith, wo Ascended toHeavenJesus and the Author of 4Q491,Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls(ABRL;

ed. J.H. Charlesworth; New York: Doubleday, 1992) 290301; and M.G. Abegg,Jr., Who Ascended to Heaven? 4Q491, 4Q427, and the eacher of Righteous-ness, Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls (eds C.A. Evans andP.W. Flint; SDSSRL 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) 6173.

Other studies on this text include E. Schuller, A Hymn from a Cave FourHodayot Manuscript: 4Q427 7 i + 11, JBL 112 (1993) 60528; J.J. Collins,and D. Dimant, A Trice-old Hymn: A Response to Eileen Schuller, JQR85(1994) 15155; J.J. Collins, A Trone in the Heavens: Apotheosis in pre-Christian Judaism, Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys (eds J.J. Collins

and M. Fishbane; Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995) 4158;Collins, Te Scepter and the Star (New York: Doubleday, 1995) 13653; M.O.Wise, Te First Messiah. Investigating the Savior Before Christ (San Francisco:Harper, 1999); M. Wise, : A Study of 4Q491c, 4Q471b, 4Q4277 and 1QHa25:3526:10, DSD7 (2000) 173219; I. Knohl, Te Messiah before

Jesus. Te Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls(Berkeley/Los Angeles: Univer-sity of California Press, 2000); C.H.. Fletcher-Louis, All the Glory of Adam:Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls(SDJ 42; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2001)199216; P.A. de Souza Nogueira, Ecstatic Worship in the Self-GlorificationHymn (4Q471B, 4Q427, 4Q491C): Implications for the Understanding of an

Ancient Jewish and Early Christian Phenomenon, Wisdom and Apocalypticism inthe Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Biblical radition (ed. F. Garca Martnez; BEL

7/30/2019 31461861

11/35


human and angelic prayer in 1QHa 19:620:6.24 Te category of theCommunity Hymns suggests that there is a clear and identifiable form-

critical referent, yet the actual texts to which it refers do not point asclearly to a coherent literary or social group.

24 In Stegemanns important and detailed discussion of the incipits in 1QHa,he notes correctly that the hodayah that begins in 19:6 is a single hodayah withmultiple sections and it continues through until 20:6. Previous scholars whohad presumed the in 19:18 to be the beginning of a new hodayah were

mistaken according to Stegemann, Te Number of Psalms in 1QHodayota

,216217. His proposal that the incipit in 19:18 did notbegin a new hodayah issupported by the evidence in 4Q427. He writes:

Te next line, XIX 18 (11:15), reads , starting just9 mm from the right margin stroke of this column. However, there is actu-ally a spot of ink before , coming from the last letter of some wordbefore, which is not noted in Sukeniks text. Tis evidence is simply ignoredby some scholars, whereas others supply here some word in a rather artifical[sic] manner. In any case XIX 18 (11:15) is regarded by almost all scholars asthe beginning of a new psalm. (21617).

Here Stegemann is speaking against the following works by A. van Selms, DeRol der Lofprijzingen: Een der Dode Zee-Rollen vertaald en toegelicht(Baarn: Boschand Keuning, 1957) 103; J. Licht, Tanksgiving Scroll, 165 (Heb.); A.M. Haber-mann,Megillot Midbar Yehudah (el Aviv: Mahbarot Lesifrut, 1959), 127 (Heb.);G. Vermes, Dead Sea Scrolls in English (London: Pelican Books, 1962) 186;E. Lohse, Die exte aux Qumran: Hebrisch und Deutsch (Darmstadt: Ksel Ver-lag, 1964) 154; B.P. Kittel, Hymns of Qumran: ranslation and Commentary(SBLDS 50; Chico: Scholars Press, 1981) 156; J. Maier, Die Qumran-Essener:exte der Schriftrollen und Lebensbild der Gemeinde (Mnchen: E. Reinhardt,

1973) 100; M.G. Abegg, Tanksgiving Hymns, Te Dead Sea Scrolls: A Newranslation (eds M. Wise, M.G. Abegg, and E. Cook; New York: HarperSan-Francisco, 1996) 107; Garca Martnez and igchelaar, Dead Sea Scrolls StudyEdition, 1.188; see Stegemann, Te Number of Psalms in 1QHodayota, 216 n.85. Te position of this hymn in 1QHa 19:620:6 and in 4Q427 may furthersuggest that it was an independent hymn that came to be included in the collec-tion compiled by theyahad. Tis hymn appears in the Cave 1 scroll of hodayot

just before the LeMaskilincipit in 20:7. Puech was the first to suggest that theLeMaskilheadings functioned in a meaningful way in 1QHa, although note thatthese do not appear in a consistent formulation throughout the scroll. He hasproposed that there were five such headings, one placed hypothetically at the verybeginning of the scroll and one reconstructed at 1QHa 20:7. See Puech,

7/30/2019 31461861

12/35


Changing Considerations of the Community of the Yah. ad

Recent scholarship has convincingly demonstrated that inquiry into thecommunity of the Dead Sea Scrolls is far more complex than the earliestgeneration of Qumran Scrolls scholars imagined.25 With respect to theunderstanding of the community that lies behind the CommunityHymns, this shift is an important one. In one of the few studies dedicatedto the Community Hymns, anzer noted in 1987 that the two especiallynoteworthy features at Qumran are the presence of Wisdom in an apoca-lyptic and priestly community, and the correlation between Wisdom andthe Law. She continued to state that:

Significantly, such developments were widespread and not limited toQumran; rather, they are reflected in the various religious milieux ofthe Hellenistic period. However, these developments as found at

the Editorial Shaping, 23356 for a discussion of how these LeMaskilheadingsmay be sites of editorial activity.

25 Some of the scholarly discussion of the term yahad, its origins, its internalconfiguration and its relationship to other Jewish groups may be traced in the

following studies: H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde(Univer-sity of Bonn Dr. Teol. Dissertation: Bonn, 1971); J.J. Collins, Te Origin ofthe Qumran Community: A Review of the Evidence, o ouch the ext: Biblicaland Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J. (eds M.P. Horgan andP.J. Kobelski; New York: Crossroad, 1989) 15978 and Collins, Forms of Com-munity in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Emanuel: Studies in the Hebrew Bible, the Septu-agint, and the Dead Sea Scrolls in Honor of Emanuel ov (ed. S.H. Paul et al.;Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2003) 97111; F. Garca Martnez, Qumran Origins and EarlyHistory: A Groningen Hypothesis, FO25 (1988) 11336; F. Garca Martnez

and A.S. van der Woude, A Groningen Hypothesis of Qumran Origins andEarly History, RevQ56 (1990) 52141; and see the views which were later sum-marized in F. Garca Martnez, Te Origins of the Essene Movement and of theQumran Sect, Te People of the Dead Sea Scrolls (trans. W.G.E. Watson; edsF. Garca Martnez and J. rebolle Barrera; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995) 7796;C. Hempel, Community Structures in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Admission, Orga-nization, Disciplinary Procedures, Te Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years. (edsP.W. Flint and J.C. VanderKam; 2 vols; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1999) 2.6792; J.C.VanderKam, Identity and History of the Community, Te Dead Sea Scrolls afterFifty Years, 2.487533; S. Metso, Whom does the erm YahadIdentify?Biblicalraditions in ransmission: Essays in Honour of Michael A. Knibb (eds C. Hempeland J. Lieu; Leiden/Boston: E.J. Brill, 2006) 21335.

7/30/2019 31461861

13/35


Qumran, form an important and promising subject for study, becauseQumran is a known community, whose way of living can be reconstructed

both archaeologically and literarily, providing one with a concrete histori-cal and social setting(italics mine).26

anzers statement is remarkable for its high degree of optimism about thehistorical and social recovery of the Qumran group, an optimism whichwas commonly held at that time.

Te confidence with which anzer viewed the community at Qumranis in tension with more recent Qumran Scrolls scholarship which has high-lighted the difficulties with reconstructing history from oftentimes fragmen-

tary literary remains.27

Te best examples of the ongoing conversations aboutthe historical reconstruction of the community and its writings have beenvoiced by scholars who have conducted redactional studies on the ruletexts28 and those who have examined the thorny question of how to dis-tinguish between sectarian and non-sectarian writings.29 In her discussion

26 anzer, Sages at Qumran, 1.27 Of course we can include the statement that was cited by Newsom at the

outset which is skeptical of the authorial identification of the eacher Hymns.Another example of this shift toward skepticism about the provenance of thetexts from the Dead Sea Scrolls library is reflected in studies on the prayer litera-ture. For example, caution is recommended by D. Falk who notes that asignificant proportion of the prayer texts lack indications of origin within theYahador otherwise contain features positively suggesting a different provenance;see D. Falk, Qumran Prayer exts and the emple, Sapiential, Liturgical andPoetical exts from Qumran. Proceedings of the Tird Meeting of the InternationalOrganization for Qumran Studies, Oslo 1998. Published in Memory of Maurice

Baillet(eds D.K. Falk, F. Garca Martnez, and E.M. Schuller; SDJ 35; Leiden/Boston/Kln: E.J. Brill, 2000) 108.28 See S. Metso, Methodological Problems in Reconstructing History from

Rule exts Found at Qumran, DSD11 (2004) 31535; Metso, Whom Doesthe erm YahadIdentify? 21335; C. Hempel, Te Qumran Sapiential extsand the Rule Books, Te Wisdom exts from Qumran and the Development of Sapiential Tought(eds C. Hempel, A. Lange, and H. Lichtenberger; BEL 159;Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002) 27795; M.L. Grossman, Reading forHistory in the Damascus Document: A Methodological Study (SDJ 45; Leiden:E.J. Brill, 2002).

29 Te best discussion of the current problems and the issues is offered by the recentarticle by C. Hempel, Kriterien zur Bestimmung essenischer Verfasserschaft

7/30/2019 31461861

14/35


of the methodological problems of reconstructing history from the analy-sis of the redactional layers of the rule texts,30 Sarianna Metso writes:

Tus, it is important to pay attention to the composite nature of therule texts when they are compared and focus on individual redac-

von Qumrantexten, Qumran kontrovers: Beitrge zu den extfunden vom otenMeer(eds J. Frey and H. Stegemann; Paderborn: Bonifatius, 2003) 7185, esp.7579. Important studies on the identification of sectarian texts at Qumraninclude: H. Lichtenberger, Kriterien fr genuine exte der Qumrangemeinde,Studien zum Menschenbild in exten der Qumrangemeinde (Gttingen: Vanden-

hoeck & Ruprecht, 1980) 1319; H. Stegemann, Die Bedeutung der Qumran-funde fr die Erforschung der Apokalyptik,Apocalypticism in the MediterraneanWorld and the Near East(ed. D. Hellholm; bingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1983) 511;Newsom, Sectually Explicit Literature from Qumran, Te Hebrew Bible andIts Interpreters(eds W.H. Propp, B. Halpern and D.N. Freedman; Winona Lake,IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 16787; L. Schiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls(Philadelphia/Jerusalem: Jewish Publication Society, 1994) 34; E.G. Chazon, IsDivrei ha-meorot a Sectarian Prayer? Te Dead Sea Scrolls: Forty Years (edsD. Dimant and U. Rappaport; SDJ 10; Leiden: E.J. Brill/Jerusalem: MagnesPress and Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi, 1992) 317; and Chazon, Prayers from Qumran

and Teir Historical Implications, DSD 1 (1994) 26584, esp. 27173;D. Dimant, Qumran Sectarian Literature,Jewish Writings of the Second emplePeriod: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus(ed.M.E. Stone; CRIN 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum and Philadelphia: Fortress Press,1984) 483550; Dimant, Te Qumran Manuscripts: Contents and Significance,ime to Prepare the Way in the Wilderness: Papers on the Qumran Scrolls by Fellowsof the Institute for Advanced Studies of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 19891990(eds D. Dimant and L.H. Schiffman; SDJ 16; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1995)2630; A. Lange and H. Lichtenberger, Qumran, Teologische Realenzyklopdie

28 (1997) 57172; D.K. Falk, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers in the DeadSea Scrolls(SDJ 27; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1998) 916; J.M. Jokiranta, Sectarian-ism of the Qumran Sect: Sociological Notes, RevQ78/20 (2001) 22339; andimportant studies on the legal material that raise questions of provenance byC. Hempel, Te Earthly Essene Nucleus of 1QSa, DSD3 (1996) 25369.

30 Many studies have been devoted to the history of the community of the Qum-ran Scrolls through an examination of the redactional layers in the rule texts, mostnotably by P.R. Davies, Te Damascus Covenant. An Interpretation of the Damas-cus Document(Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1983); S. Metso, Te extualDevelopment of the Qumran Community Rule(SDJ 21; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1997);

Metso, Methodological Problems, 31535; C. Hempel, Te Laws of the Damas-cus Document: Sources, radition, and Redaction (SDJ 29; Leiden: E.J. Brill,

7/30/2019 31461861

15/35


tional units rather than on complete documents as if they were liter-ary unities. Redactional matters as highlighted by textual similarities

and differences must be taken into consideration before historicalapplications can be made. Comparison of the rule texts indicates thatdifferent groups shared certain materials, perhaps sharing older mate-rial in common, perhaps borrowing from each other. Tis probablymeans that one group formulated the material, which presumablymatched the activity of that group. When a different group borrowedthat material because they thought it was valuable, it is not necessaryto conclude that the new group acted out every detail of the passage;thus it would be misleading to make the direct connection betweenthat groups texts and its historical activity.31

Although the hodayot are a different type of literature from the rule textsdiscussed by Metso, her point is well taken. Scholars should rememberthat the large collection of hodayot that is represented in 1QHa reflects aparticularorder of hymns. I emphasize its particularity because there wereother arrangements of the collection in circulation prior to and concur-rently with the collection that was discovered in Cave 1. Much of thescholarly discussion of the hodayot has assumed 1QHa to be a more stable

collection than it has shown itself to be given the evidence from Cave 4.32Te collection in 1QHa is the product of a literary development. Tereare signs that it has been compiled in a purposeful way even though todayit is not clear what that purpose was.33 Metsos point, too, about the

1998); Hempel, Community Structures in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 6792;Hempel, Te Qumran Sapiential exts and the Rule Books, 27795; Hempel,Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 7185.

31

Metso, Methodological Problems, 33031.32 E.g., the order and arrangement of hymns in 4Q427 is clearly differentfrom 1QHa. Te only example of a Cave 4 scroll that has been reconstructed as ascroll of similar size and hymn order to 1QHa is 4Q428; however, some of thefragment locations are tentative. Only two very fragmentary pieces have survivedwhich overlap with the first nine cols of 1QHa. Te words themselves are not dis-tinctive within the scroll and are only tentatively located; Schuller, DJD 29.128,13334.

33 Very few scholars have commented on the overall shaping of 1QHa. Puechhas proposed that the incipits that include function in a meaningful

way in 1QHa in his article, Quelques aspects de la restauration, 523; see alsoPuech, Hodayot, Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls(eds L.H. Schiffman and

7/30/2019 31461861

16/35


sharing or borrowing of material, perhaps even pre-sectarian material, isalso a scenario that may be applied to the situation of the hodayot. In the

case of prayer and poetry, the borrowing of texts is likely because poeticcompositions and collections are discrete units that can be lifted cleanlyfrom one literary context and placed into new ones. Examples of such aphenomenon are present not only in the texts at Qumran but also in othercontexts.34

As a collection, the hodayot were presumably compiled and used bythe community at Qumran and may be considered sectarian in the most

J.C. VanderKam; 2 vols; New York: Oxford University Press, 2000) 1.38687;and Harkins, Observations on the Editorial Shaping, 23539. However, it isnot clear what purpose 1QHa had. Was it compiled for a literary or liturgicalpurpose? Even though the compositions themselves may have been used in acommunal setting, the collection as a whole lacks the kinds of markers that onemight expect for a liturgical text. See the discussion of these liturgical markers byChazon, Prayers from Qumran, esp. 27374 and the additional criteria offeredby Falk, Daily, Sabbath, and Festival Prayers, 1617. Te Cave 4 evidence showsthat there were multiple versions of these collections in circulation, suggesting

that some collections may have developed in parallel and not in linear fashion.34 Both discrete poetic collections and compositions could be lifted from one

context and placed in another. In the case of discrete poetic collections, onemight consider here the literary group known as the Elohistic Psalter (Pss 4283),e.g., L. Joffe, Te Elohistic Psalter: What, How and Why? SJO 15 (2001)14269; also the Psalms of Ascents (Pss 120134), e.g., K. Seybold, Die Redak-tion der Wallfahrtspsalmen, ZAW91 (1979) 24768; L.D. Crow, Te Songs of

Ascents (Psalms 120134): Teir Place in Israelite History and Religion (SBLDS 148;Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996). Tere is a large body of literature on the shape of

the Psalter at Qumran. For two representative approaches, see P.W. Flint, TeDead Sea Psalms Scroll and the Book of Psalms(SDJ 17; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1997),and G.H. Wilson, Te Editing of the Hebrew Psalter(SBLDS 76; Atlanta: ScholarsPress, 1985). One example of an individual composition that has been relocatedis the hymn which is placed in the mouth of Jesus ben Sira in Sir 51:1317 butalso appears to be placed in the mouth of David in 11QPsa, and Ps. 18 whichalso appears in 2 Sam 22; see A. Kim, Authorizing Interpretation in PoeticCompositions in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Later Jewish and Christian radi-tions, DSD10 (2003) 2658; or see the studies on the borrowing of prayersfrom second temple Judaism by the early Christians in J.H. Charlesworth, AProlegomenon to a New Study of the Jewish Background of the Hymns andPrayers in the New estament,JJS33 (1982) 26585.

7/30/2019 31461861

17/35


general sense.35 Te hodayot scroll from Cave 1 is best understood as ananthology that has incorporated compositions and even entire collections

that may have existed independently. Such a scenario would explain whysome Community Hymns use the language familiar to the yahadwhileothers prefer more generic language. Both the location of the eacherHymns material within the collection 1QHaand its attestation as an inde-pendent literary collection (possibly 4Q429 and 4Q432) are empiricalevidence that smaller collections are embedded in the Cave 1 scroll. 36Indeed, a group that has splintered off from a larger group would havecomposed their own writings anew. But it seems reasonable that thosetexts that continued to hold significance for them would have also beenretained from the parent group. I should clarify here that I am not chal-lenging the general sectarian identification of the hodayot scroll 1QHa,but rather the unnuanced understanding of the hodayot scroll, specificallythe Community Hymns. In her studies of the rule texts from Qumran,Charlotte Hempel offers an important qualification of the understandingof sectarian that had been proposed by Carol Newsom in her essaySectually Explicit Literature.37 Hempel writes:

35 Te collection may be considered to be sectarian in the sense that itincludes sectarian texts, see Newsom, Sectually Explicit, 16787. In that essay,Newsom offers a more general understanding of sectarian than the strict tradi-tional understanding of sectarian proposed by Stegemann, Die Bedeutung derQumranfunde fr die Erforschung der Apokalyptik, 495530. Even though theprecise authorial identification of the eacher Hymns is disputed by Newsom,the sectarian identification of the eacher Hymns is not.

36 According to Schullers reconstruction of the Cave 4 hodayot, the fragments

that comprise 4Q429 have been arranged into a short scroll of approximatelyeight columns. Te surviving fragments overlap with only the eacher Hymnsmaterial from cols 13 and 14. Te papyrus fragments of 4Q432 have also beenreconstructed into a scroll that seems, as well, to have contained only eacherHymns; however, this particular scroll (4Q432) includes overlaps with the cre-ation hymn in col. 9, which likely served as an introduction to the eacherHymns collection. Te reconstruction of 4Q432 is approximately 31 cols, mea-suring approximately five meters in length. Tis scroll is also dated as a contem-porary of 1QHaand identified as an early Herodian hand; Schuller, DJD 29.211.Te Cave 4 fragments of the hodayot were first identified by J. Strugnell in Letravail ddition des fragments manuscrits de Qumrn, RB63 (1956) 64.

37 Newsom, Sectually Explicit Literature, 179.

7/30/2019 31461861

18/35


In sum, I would like to qualify Newsoms definition of sectarian textsby stressing the composite nature of many key documents from the

Qumran library. Not all the components of works that are sectarianin their final form should be defined as sectarian themselves.38

Even though the scroll 1QHa itself may have been compiled and used bya sectarian community, it does not necessarily follow that all of the compo-nents of that collection were compositions by members of the yahad, andin fact, there are clusters of compositions in 1QHa that completely lacktraditional sectarian markers.

Te Community/ies of the Community Hymns and theCommunity Rule

Here I would like to consider the relationship between the so-called Com-munity Hymns of the hodayot and the community of the yahad, thegroup known from texts like the Serekh ha-Yahad. Various scholars haveattempted to formulate criteria that can identify a texts sectarian origins.39Te traditional criteria that we will consider are: (1) scribal practices;

(2) paleography; (3) sectarian language; (4) sectarian theology or world-view. Charlotte Hempel has emphasized that many of these traditionalapproaches can be helpful in considering whether or not a text may becompatible with sectarian authorship, but they cannot conclusively deter-mine sectarian authorship.40 For example, she points out that traditionallyscholars have used the criteria of distinctive terminology and sectarianideological views to determine sectarian authorship. Both of these, how-ever, may be inherited from the parent group.41 When one takes seriouslythe possibility that the non-biblical texts at Qumran include both compo-

38 Hempel, Laws of the Damascus Document, 20.39 See the survey of scholarship and discussion of criteria by Hempel, Krite-

rien zur Bestimmung, esp. 7579. Many of these works were cited previously inn. 23.

40 Hempel, Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 79. Another traditional criterion thatHempel challenges in a similar manner is the 364-day calendar. She also discussesthe criteria of citation of a community specific text and the paleographic dating

of texts (7879).41 Hempel, Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 7677.

7/30/2019 31461861

19/35


sitions by that community and a number of inherited writings from theparent group, it appears that many of the criteria of sectarian authorship

can at most point to the possibility of sectarian authorship or a texts com-patibility with sectarian authorship.42 Hempel also discusses the tradi-tional criteria of scribal characteristics and paleography associated withEmanuel ovs proposal for a Qumran scribal school. She writes that thesecan only point to the copying of a text at Qumran, certainly a necessaryprecondition for sectarian authorship, but not a clear proof of sectariancomposition.43

42

Hempel, Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 84.43 Hempel, Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 7778; Hempel goes on to writethat the following characteristics, the composition of texts in Hebrew or theavoidance of the tetragrammaton, can help in the identification of texts that pos-sibly cohere with the sects writings. Like orthography, however, they cannot con-clusively prove sectarian authorship, Kriterien zur Bestimmung, 78. A similarpoint was made by Chazon, A Sectarian Prayer?

ovs proposal of a distinctive scribal school at Qumran has been refinedthroughout the years and has appeared in his following works: Te Orthogra-phy and Language of the Hebrew Scrolls Found at Qumran and the Origin of

Tese Qumran Scrolls, extus13 (1986) 3157; Hebrew Biblical Manuscriptsfrom the Judaean Desert: Teir Contribution to extual Criticism,JJS39 (1988)537; Scribal Practices Reflected in the Documents from the Judean Desert andin the Rabbinic Literature: A Comparative Study, exts, emples, and radition:

A ribute to Menahem Haran (ed. M.V. Fox et al.; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns,1995) 383403; efillin of Different Origin from Qumran? A Light for Jacob:Studies in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls in Memory of Jacob Shalom Licht(eds

Y. Hoffman and F. Polak; Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1997) 4454 (Heb.); Fur-ther Evidence for the Existence of a Qumran Scribal School,Te Dead Sea Scrolls:

Fifty Years After Teir Discovery 19471997, 199216; and, Scribal Practicesand Approaches Reflected in the exts Found in the Judean Desert(SDJ 54; Leiden:E.J. Brill, 2004). Notice that ovs proposal of a distinctive scribal school atQumran is not an exclusive one that claims that the Qumran scribes alone fol-lowed such practice, yet at times the idea of a scribal school has been misused byscholars. Note, too, the cautionary remarks by E.C. Ulrich in Multiple LiteraryEditions: Reflections oward a Teory of the History of the Biblical ext, TeDead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible(SDSSRL; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans/Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1999) 111:

I think the term Qumran practice is sufficiently misleading that it should

be abandoned, for at least two reasons. First, the features noted are encounteredonly erratically in the Qumran Scrolls, and most of them are not unique to

7/30/2019 31461861

20/35


Could it be that 1QHa is a sectarian scroll that has incorporated non-sectarian material? Here it is important to recall the composite nature of

the scroll 1QHa. In ovs most recent book-length study of the scribalpractices at Qumran, he has identified the hodayot scroll as sectarian,even though signs of a distinctive scribal school are unevenly presentamong the hodayot Qumran Scrolls. One example of a distinctive prac-tice associated with the scribal school at Qumran is the use of paleo-He-brew script for the tetragrammaton or the name of God. In the scroll1QHa, paleo-Hebrew appears, but inconsistently. It appears in lieu of theword God (not the tetragrammaton) in 1QHa 7:38; 9:28; 10:36 and in1QHb frag. 1 line 5. ov suggests that these were probably all quotations.In other words, the scribe was reproducing exactly what was in his Vor-lage44 and did not attempt to harmonize or unify the scroll by usingpaleo-Hebrew throughout for God or the divine name.45 Anotherunusual feature of 1QHa is the change in scribal hands in column 19:15.Scribe A, who copied columns 119 of 1QHa, followed his Vorlage textrather closely without taking the liberty to smooth out the irregularitiesthat were present among the texts that he was copying. Tis scribe hascopied sections of 1QHa that use both the short orthographic forms and

the long orthographic forms.46

Tis suggests that his exemplar also exhib-

Qumran but are also found either in [M] itself or in other texts, often bib-lical. . . . Second, the term Qumran practice in fact misleads. It is increas-ingly quoted without ovs nuance, and is thus proclaimed as established factrather than as tentative hypothesis.

See, too, J.C. VanderKam and P.W. Flint, Te Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls(New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 2002) 14447; and D.-H. Kim, Free Orthog-raphy in a Strict Society: Reconsidering ovs Qumran Orthography, DSD11

(2004) 7281 and also ovs response Reply to Dong-Hyuk Kims Paper onovs Qumran Orthography, DSD11 (2004) 35960, where he is right to notethat Kims study had not taken into account any of his work subsequent to his1986 article.

44 ov, Scribal Practices and Approaches, 242.45 See the description of the scribal hands of 1QHa in ov, Scribal Practices

and Approaches, 2122.46 Te orthography changes in 1QHa 7:12 (frag. 10) and the longer form of

the pronominal suffix appears with greater regularity here in this fragment thanin the surrounding CH material. Te longer forms that appear here in this hod-ayah (one of the few we-hymns in 1QHa) suggest that Scribe A copied his textfrom an exemplar that may have resembled the text of the hymn known from

7/30/2019 31461861

21/35


ited diverse scribal practices and could have come from different sourcematerial.47 Te inconsistency of scribal practices in 1QHa from the same

scribal hand suggests that the scribe was copying from texts that showedthese various literary features and did not introduce them himself.

If the presence of sectarian language and theology points at best to thepossibility of sectarian authorship or to the preconditions necessary forsectarian authorship, instead of conclusive evidence in favor of it, asHempel suggests, then perhaps texts that show an absence of sectarianelements, ideology, and scribal practices may possess the preconditions fornon-sectarian authorship. When the Community Hymns are examinedfor the presence of sectarian language and theology, it is possible toobserve a consistent absence of sectarian features from particular groups ofCommunity Hymns, as we shall see.48

4Q427, a scroll that consistently uses the fuller orthography. Te we-hymn infrag. 10 appears in 1QHa immediately before a LeMaskil heading, suggestingthat scribe introduced it at a seam in the collection, after having faithfully copiedthe text that was in his Vorlage. Here the editor has grouped this composition

with other similar compositions that also presume a communal context (e.g.,5:126:33). I do not think that it is necessary to conclude that frag. 10 has beenmisplaced by scholars, as Hughes suggests in Scriptural Allusions, 65 n. 8, whereshe writes:

However, Schuller notes that line 13 of 4QHa 8 I and line 11 of 1QHa 10could be considered as overlapping. Schuller also notes that the orthographyof 1QHa 10 is different from the rest of the first 8 columns of 1QHa. Itis possible therefore that 1QHa10 is misplaced. See Schuller, Hodayot, 111nn. 51, 52.

I do not interpret Schullers note as proposing that frag. 10 is misplaced.47 Te orthography in the Community Hymns material that precedes theeacher Hymns, namely columns 18, largely reflects defective orthography, withthe exception of the hodayah in frag. 10 (7:1220). See ov, Scribal Practices and

Approaches, 22 and Holm-Nielsens discussion of the orthographic variation in Hod-ayot, 1011; and also Douglas, Power and Praise, 40412.

48 In her most recent monograph, Newsom mentions a caution that is worthrepeating here: because communities participate in multiple discourses, the evalua-tion of terminology as sectarian or not must also account for the fact that somewords are common property and used by various social groups. Terefore some

words, because they are so pervasive, can never be identified as distinctively andexclusively sectarian. See Newsom, Self as Symbolic Space, 11.

7/30/2019 31461861

22/35


Scholars who work on the rule texts from Qumran have identifiedthe word yahad ( community), the expression ha-rabbm (

the Many), and Belial( ), as distinctive sectarian terms. Te wordyahad appears approximately sixty times in 1QS as a noun and is alsoused adverbially at least nine times.49 A majority of the sixty nominal cita-tions appears as the definite form, the community ( ).50 In 1QHa, theword appears thirteen times adverbially. Seven of these occurrences are in thetexts traditionally associated with the eacher Hymns,51 and in the followinglocations among the so-called Community Hymns: 6:29 ( ); 18:36( ); 19:17 ( ), 28 ( [ ).52 Italso appears twice in the unusual we-hymn in 7:18 = frag. 10 6 (

) and 7:19 = frag. 10 7 ( ).53 In the Cave 4 textof 4Q427, the word appears adverbially in three places: first in frag. 7 i 15( [ ), later in line 18 of that same fragment (

); and lastly in 7 ii 9 ( ).54 With the exception ofthe last instance, all of the appearances of the word are adverbial.55 Ifwe then map out the instances of the word in the Community Hymnssections, it appears that the word appears in each one of the five

49 According to M.G. Abegg, Jr. with J.E. Bowley and E.M. Cook, in consul-tation with E. ov, Te Dead Sea Scrolls Concordance: Vol. 1 Te Non-Biblical exts

from Qumran, part 1 of 2(2 vols; Leiden/Boston: E.J. Brill, 2003) 1.3078.50 Tere are at least 35 clear instances of according to ov, Te Dead Sea

Scrolls Concordance, 3078.51 1QHa11:23, 24; 12:25; 13:24, 32; 14:16; 16:6; n.b. 1QHa12:25 is a supra-

lineal addition.52 Tis reconstruction is proposed by Stegemann in his Rekonstruktion der

Hodajot.53 See also the corresponding sections to 1QHa 7 in 4Q427 frag. 8 i 10( [ ) and the partially reconstructed word in line 13 ofthat same fragment ( [ ). Te latter instance is not preserved in 1QHa.

54 Tis Cave 4 fragment has been used in the reconstruction of col. 26 of1QHa; see DJD 29.96116.

55 Of all of the appearances of in 1QHa, only one is clearly in noun form.An adverbial use of the word appears at least nine times among the Cave 4texts known as 4QInstruction (4Q415 9, 7; 4Q415 11, 4; 4Q416 2 iii 21;4Q416 2 iv 5; 4Q418 103 ii 9; 4Q418 167a+b, 5; 4Q418 167a+b, 6; 4Q418199, 1; 4Q418a 13, 1) but like 1QHa, the word never appears as a noun in4QInstruction.

7/30/2019 31461861

23/35


LeMaskilclusters of Community Hymns with the exception of the firstone (hypothetically proposed) and the fourth one (1QHa 20:725:33).56

In other words, a word that was most likely a technical term in the Serekhha-Yahaddoes not appear consistently throughout the Community Hymnsmaterial of 1QHa.

Another term that appears in 1QS with some frequency is the term, the Many.57 Scholars have already observed that column five of

the Cave 1 copy of the Serekh shows signs of a Zadokite recension thatsought to replace the term with the phrase .58 Te form,

56

In other words, the wordyah

adappears twice in the second LeMaskilgroup-ing that begins in 5:12; three times in the third LeMaskilgrouping that resumesafter the eacher Hymns material, (i.e. in the two hodayot, 17:3819:5 and19:620:6); and in the last LeMaskilgrouping that begins in 25:34, which isreconstructed from the Cave 4 text 4Q427 frag. 7. Te word also appears in4Q428 frag. 12 i 2, which corresponds with 1QHa19:28.

57 See the discussion by Hempel, Community Structures in the Dead SeaScrolls, 6792.

58 Many conclude that the shorter version found in the Cave 4 manuscripts(4QSb,d) which has the Many ( ) is more original; see J.. Milik, Le tra-

vail ddition des fragments manuscripts de Qumrn, RB63 (1956) 4967, esp.61; G. Vermes, Preliminary Remarks on Unpublished Fragments of the Com-munity Rule from Qumran Cave 4,JJS42 (1991) 25055; Vermes, Te Lead-ership of the Qumran Community: Sons of ZadokPriestsCongregation,Geschichte-radition-Reflexion. Festschrift fr Martin Hengel zum 70. Geburtstag(eds H. Cancik, H. Lichtenberger, and P. Schfer; bingen: MohrSiebeck,1996) 1.37584; P.S. Alexander, Te Redaction History ofSerek ha-Yahad: AProposal, RevQ17 (1996) 43753; A.I. Baumgarten, Te Zadokite Priests atQumran, DSD 4 (1997) 13756; J.H. Charlesworth and B.A. Strawn,

Reflections on the ext ofSerek ha-YahadFound in Cave IV, RevQ17 (1996)40335; P.R. Davies, Sects and Scrolls: Essays on Qumran and Related opics(SFSHJ 134; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996) 15456; P. Garnet, Cave 4 Ms Par-allels to 1QS 5.17: owards a Serek ext History, JSP 15 (1997) 6778;C. Hempel, Comments on the ranslation of 4QSd I, 1,JJS44 (1993) 12728;S. Metso, extual Development of the Qumran Community Rule, 122; Metso,Methodological Problems, 324. See also R. Kugler, A Note on 1QS 9:14: TeSons of Righteousness or the Sons of Zadok, DSD3 (1996) 31520, where hesuggests that there is another example of a Zadokite recension in 1QS 9:14 whichreads the sons of Zadok ( ), cf. 4QSe 1 iii 10 which reads the sons ofrighteousness ( ); Hempel, Community Structures in the Dead SeaScrolls, 8283.

7/30/2019 31461861

24/35


with the definite article appears no fewer than thirty-three times inthe Serekh ha-Yahad.59 Te word ( / / ) appears in an adjectival

sense in either singular or plural form in both the Community and theeacher Hymns.60 Te plural form appears as a substantive in 1QHa 7:24(] ); 10:29 ( ); 12:28 (

), 29 ( ).61 All of these references are found withinthe eacher Hymns material with the exception of the reference from col-umn 7, appearing in the hodayah which begins the LeMaskilsection in7:21 (1QHa 7:218:41). Te third term that is associated with the sectis . Of the Cave 1 texts, this term appears five times in 1QS, sixtimes in CD, and twelve times in 1QM.62 Te same term appears eleventimes in scroll 1QHa, exclusively among the eacher Hymns material at10:18, 24; 11:29, 30, 33; 12:14 (twice); 13:28, 41; 14:24; 15:6 and neverappears in the Community Hymns. Tis brief examination of community-specific terminology shows that characteristic terms that appear in ruletexts do not appear consistently in the scroll 1QHa. We must also keep inmind Hempels nuance that the presence of community-specific languagecan only suggest the possibility of sectarian authorship and not conclu-sively prove it.

59 1QS 6:1, 7, 8, 9, 11 (twice), 12 (twice), 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 (twice), 18, 20(twice), 21, 25; 7:10 (twice), 13, 16 (twice), 19, 20 (twice), 21, 24, 25; 8:19, 26;9:2. In fact, the definite form, Te Many, appears to be isolated among theRule texts from Caves 1 and 4, copies of the Damascus Document from Caves 1and 4 (4Q265; 4Q284a; 4Q477). Te indefinite form of this word, , orMany, appears twice in the Serekh and both times in construct with the wordpure food ( ; 1QS 6:25; 7:3). Te indefinite form of this word also

appears twice in the copy of 1QSb

3:18 and 4:27. Of the thirteen instances wherea form of this word appears in 1QpHab, only five of these instances involve theindefinite word used as a substantive (1QpHab 2:13; 4:2; 6:10; 10:9, 11);the remaining eight instances of this word seem to be used adjectivally (1QpHab4:3, 7; 6:8; 8:15; 9:3, 14; 10:2, 4). It is not clear to me if the appearance of thedefinite or indefinite use of the plural form is meaningful.

60 Adjectival forms of the word appear in 1QHa 8:26 ([ ] ); 10:18 ( ),29 ( ); 11:22 ( ), 26 ( ), 33 ( ); 13:10 (

); frag. 5, 8 ( ).61 Tere is a possible reading in frag. 45, 6 ( [ ), but it is not clear.62 Te term appears in 1QS 1:18, 24; 2:5, 19; 10:21; CD 4:13, 15; 5:18; 8:2;

12:2; 19:14; 1QM 1:1, 5, 13; 4:2; 11:8; 13:2, 4, 11; 14:9; 15:3; 18:1, 3.

7/30/2019 31461861

25/35


Nevertheless, we can observe some patterns when we compare the pres-ence of distinctive sectarian language in the eacher Hymns and in the Com-

munity Hymns. Whereas sectarian terminology appears in the eacherHymns material, it is present unevenly among the Community Hymns.Some sections show alignment with the sectarian language to varyingdegrees, while others consistently do not. Te sections of CommunityHymns that show the strongest alignment with the terminology knownfrom the sectarian text 1QS are the second LeMaskilgrouping (5:127:20)and the third LeMaskilgrouping (7:2120:6, the eacher Hymns materialis embedded in this grouping). Te hypothetical first LeMaskilgroupingthat begins at the beginning of the scroll (now lost), and continues until1QHa 5:12, consistently shows an absence of sectarian terminology or analignment with texts that are thought to be pre-sectarian.

Te consistent absence of sectarian features is not however conclusiveproof that a text is non-Qumranic, but it is a helpful way of identifyingpossible non-sectarian candidates. Such candidates possess generic quali-ties that would allow them to be easily transferred into new communitycontexts. Esther Chazon writes the following qualification about usingthe non-sectarian language as a criterion for non-Qumranic origins:

[]he absence of such distinctive terms and ideas does not necessarilymean that the document was composed outside of this communitysince a member of the sect could have authored the text withoutrecourse to specifically sectarian language. Terefore, this criterioncan be used as an indication of non-Qumranic origin only if the doc-ument is actually at variance with the sects ideology or if it fails todisplay Qumranic language and ideas where its contents or literarycharacter would appear to require them had the document beenauthored by a member of the sect.63

In other words, generic biblical language is itself neither a proof for noragainst non-Qumranic composition. However, in those cases where thereis a clear tension with sectarian ideology, texts that lack sectarian featuresmay be seriously considered to be non-Qumranic.

Te hodayot or sections of a long hodayah that have survived in col. 4of 1QHa are characterized by generic language and theology. Tere are at

63 See Chazon, Prayers from Qumran, 272, where she cites the example of

4QDibHam as a text where one might expect to find Qumranic historical con-cepts and terminology; see too Chazon, Sectarian Prayer? 1417.

7/30/2019 31461861

26/35


least four hodayot or parts of hodayot that have been preserved in thiscolumn to some degree (4:13[?]20; 2127; 2937; and 38[?]). One

short hodayah, 4:2127, offers the only instance of an explicit appealto Moses, a figure who is only alluded to in other places in the scroll.While the hymnist evokes biblical figures or personas through allusionsor references to scriptural texts in many places in the scroll, very rarelydoes he explicitly name a biblical figure.64 In her comments on these com-positions, anzer noted that there was an absence of the strong Wisdomelements that were present in other Community Hymns and no explicitreference to characteristic calendrical or ideological traditions associatedwith the yahad.65 In 4:2127, an unusual reference to the Glory ofAdam ( ) appears which is not attested elsewhere among thehodayot. Te expression does, however, appear in 1QS 4:23 within a sec-tion that some have argued to be a pre-sectarian composition, the so-called wo-Spirits reatise in 1QS 3:134:26.66

Te hodayah in 4:2127 shares much in common with the followingcomposition in 4:2937.67 In the hodayah of 4:2937, once again, thereis a similar situation of generic language use. Te first composition citesMoses name explicitly in 4:24. Te second composition recalls the Deu-

64 Various studies on the hymnists use of scripture have appeared. Some ofthese include Holm-Nielsen, Hodayot; P. Wernberg-Mller, Te Contribution ofthe Hodayot to Biblical extual Criticism, extus4 (1964) 14573; B.P. Kittel,Te Hymns of Qumran: ranslation and Commentary(SBLDS 50; Chico: ScholarsPress, 1981); and most recently Hughes, Scriptural Allusions and Exegesis.

65 anzer, Te Sages at Qumran, 67, remarks on how the wisdom elements ofrhetorical statements or questions are absent in this hodayah.

66 A. Lange argues that this section in 1QS could likely be pre-sectarian

because of the absence of distinctive terminology, Weisheit und Prdestination:Weisheitliche Urordnung und Prdestination in den extfunden von Qumran (SDJ18; Leiden: Brill, 1995) 12728. See also the studies by J. Duhaime, DualisticReworking in the Scrolls from Qumran, CBQ49 (1987) 3256 and LInstructionsur les deux esprits et les interpolations dualistes Qumrn (1QS III, 13IV, 26),RB84 (1977) 56694. Te expression also appears in CD 3:20 and in 4QInstruc-tion; for the latter see Goff, Reading Wisdom at Qumran, 282.

67 I say that it is only possible because we do not have the entire line pre-served. Te last words in line 4:28 would make good sense as a conclusion to thishodayah. However, it may be that there were one or two words at the very begin-ning which have been lost since there are approximately ten spaces at the beginningof this line.

7/30/2019 31461861

27/35


teronomic theme of loving what God loves and hating what God hates:o walk in all that you love and to despise all that which you hate

( ] [ ). Perhaps thesehodayot were grouped together in col. 4 due to their Mosaic orientation.Tis common theme together with their shared confession of sinfulnessand expression of confidence in God may have motivated an editor tocluster them together.

Tere is one final hodayah in col. 4 that begins at line 38 which alsolacks distinctively sectarian features. In this composition, however, thereis also an expression that is at tension with typical sectarian language.Here the hymnist writes, I will examine every human/Adamic covenant( ).68 While the language of covenant appearsthroughout the scrolls literature in a variety of combinations for both thespecial covenant relationship of the sect and also that of the wicked, thisis the only instance of the expression human/Adamic covenant in theDSS. Te absence of sectarian language here cannot be explained as ascriptural allusion because this expression also never appears in theHebrew Bible. Te hodayah itself gives little insight into how this expres-sion was used since so little of it remains. In the scroll 1QHa, the word

covenant ( ) appears twenty-six times.69

An overwhelming number ofthese instances appear with the second masculine singular pronominalsuffix with God as the antecedent ( / ).70 Tere are only twoinstances where covenant is not understood to be the covenant withGod. Te first is in 4:39 which speaks of every Adamic/human covenantand the second is in 13:25 where the speaker refers to my covenant.71

68 In Stegemanns reconstruction of this column in his unpublished disserta-

tion, Rekonstruktion der Hodajot, he has proposed , but that reading is tenta-tive. Only the shin is visible with traces of the vavand the nun. One study of theunderstanding of covenant in the hodayot is offered by M.O. Wise whose focusis on the eacher Hymns, Te Concept of a New Covenant in the eacherHymns from Qumran (1QHa XXVII), Te Concept of the Covenant in the Sec-ond emple Period (eds S.E. Porter and J.C.R. De Roo; Leiden: Brill, 2003)99128.

69 See 1QHa 4:27, 6:33; 7:28, 31; 8:25, 33, 10:24, 30; 12:6, 20, 25, 35, 36,40; 13:11, 25; 15:11, 13, 23; 18:32; 21:10, 14; 22:15, 27; 23:9; 27:7.

70 In 1QHa 10:24, the unusual suffix form ( -) appears with .71 In this passage from 1QHa13:25, the speaker is distinguishing his covenant

from the pact made with his adversaries.

7/30/2019 31461861

28/35


Column 4s reference to the idea of every human covenant is in tensionwith the much more restrictive understanding of covenant that appears

throughout 1QHa.In brief, the four poetic units or parts of poetic units that appear in

col. 4 show a consistent absence of sectarian language. Te language thatappears in this column is generic insofar as it appeals generally andspecifically to scriptural images and expressions common in the secondtemple period. Te editor responsible for compiling these poetic units incol. 4 may have associated these compositions together based on theircommon Deuteronomic themes. Tese four texts are also linked verballyby the expressions, spirit/spirits or your servant. Te word spirit/spirits appears in the first unit, 4:14, 18, 19; the third unit, 4:29, 35; andthe fourth unit, 4:38. Te phrase your servant also links these smallerunits in col. 4, occurring in the second unit, 4:23; in the third unit, 4:37;and the fourth unit, 4:38. It is also the case that there is at least oneinstance of non-sectarian language in this column that cannot beexplained as a biblical reference or allusion.

Te absence of sectarian language in the compositions in col. 4 maypoint to their candidacy as a group of non-sectarian compositions. Identi-

fying sectarian language is particularly difficult in the case of poetic texts,as Eileen Schuller noted more than ten years ago. She was right to state atthat time:

I suspect that this body of texts will remain the most resistant to sucha distinction. Te very essence of prayer/hymnic discourse, whethersectarian or non-sectarian, is its dependence on a common stock ofstereotypical and formulaic, biblically-based phraseology. Tose pre-cise features that scholars have singled out as hallmarks in recognizingsectarianwhether institutional clues (eacher of Righteousness, cal-endar) or theological concepts (predeterminism, dualism)are leastlikely to come to expression in a prayer text. Although this is readilyrecognized on one level, I am afraid that at times we work with veryoutdated understandings of the function of liturgical language, stillconceiving it as predominately cognitive and fundamentally a vehiclefor polemical and theological discourse.72

72 E.M. Schuller, Prayer, Hymnic, and Liturgical exts from Qumran, TeCommunity of the Renewed Covenant: Te Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead SeaScrolls(eds E.C. Ulrich and J.C. VanderKam; Notre Dame, Ind.: University of

7/30/2019 31461861

29/35


Studies have demonstrated well that stereotypical language in the style ofthe biblical psalms or other biblical writings appears to be a general liter-

ary convention in the prayer literature of the second temple period.73Judith Newman describes this phenomenon as scripturalization which shedefines as the reuse of biblical texts or interpretive traditions to shape thecomposition of new literature.74 Tis practice of using scriptural languagefor the composition of prayers could have functioned to give the newcomposition a familiarity which it did not have. Communities who wereinnovative, like the community of the yahad, might have used biblicalphraseology and scriptural style for the purpose of legitimating texts thatwere themselves innovative. Te hope would be to present innovativecompositions within a framework that associated them with older pre-existing traditions like those related to Sinai or with clearly authoritativefigures like the founding figure of Moses.75 Perhaps the hodayot in4:2127 and 4:2937 were introduced into the collection to associate thecollection with these easily recognizable traditions. Yet this picture is com-plicated by the reference to a non-biblical idea of covenant (everyAdamic/human covenant) that appears in 4:27. Tis expression, anunusual one for the hodayot, may not be attributed to any biblical text.

While it is possible to understand some of the hodayot from col. 4 tobe compositions written in imitation of a pre-existing form, it is difficultto understand how a text like 4:27, which uses both a non-biblical expres-sion and a non-sectarian formulation, could have been composed by asectarian.

Te use of scriptural language in the absence of innovative theology,sectarian ideology, or sectarian language does not offer strong evidence infavor of sectarian composition. Te poetic compositions in 1QHa col. 4may be described simply as texts that appeal to traditions common to

Notre Dame Press, 1994) 170. She concludes with this question: Do the gene-rating impulses that lead to division and a new self-identity necessarily findexpression in new prayers? What are retained of old prayers, and how are theyunderstood?

73 See J.H. Newman, Praying by the Book: Te Scripturalization of Prayer inSecond emple Judaism (SBLEJL 14; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1999). She discussesSchullers quote in the appendix of her study, 239 n. 37.

74 Newman, Praying by the Book, 1213.75 See the strategies discussed by Najman, Seconding Sinai, 1617.

7/30/2019 31461861

30/35


second temple Judaism but this presupposes that the sectarian authorswere writing in imitation of pre-existing literary forms and at variance

with other compositions in 1QHa that do show clear signs of sectarianmarkers.

Te location of this small cluster of hodayot in col. 4, which shareeither a Mosaic orientation or a Deuteronomic theology, effectively asso-ciates the sectarian hodayot with a recognizable tradition common to awide variety of Jewish communities in antiquity. Whether or not thecompositions in col. 4 were actually authored by the same community oftheyahadresponsible for the other sections of 1QHa does not weaken theeffect that the presence of this collection of Mosaic hodayot has upon thescroll. At the same time, this small collection of hodayot does not meetmany of the traditional criteria for sectarian authorship at Qumran. Giventhe many signs that 1QHa is an anthology of poetic compositions com-piled from texts that had independent literary contexts, perhaps we shouldnot exclude the possibility that the collection of hodayot from col. 4,which appeals to traditions common in second temple Judaism, was com-posed outside of Qumran and brought into the hodayot collection 1QHa.It is also the case that these compositions from col. 4 show very tentative

evidence of having been preserved in the Cave 4 copies of hodayot.76

Te Dead Sea Scrolls have demonstrated that prayer texts enjoyed greatfluidity in antiquity, appearing in various literary contexts, both prose andpoetic. A prayer with particularly generic characteristics may be morelikely to appear in various community settings as well. It also seems thattoday, scholars of the Qumran Scrolls recognize more than ever that therelationship between the community of the yahadand the texts that areassociated with them may be understood in ways that are much more var-ied than the early generation of scholars imagined. Some texts, like the

pesharim, may be original compositions of theyah

ad, but other texts may

76 It has been proposed that the first fragment of 4Q428 may share an overlapwith 1QHa 4:3940, but this placement has been called a possible parallel andwould result in the extraordinary length of nine and a half meters for 4Q428which would have required that it had as many as 68 columns. Tis would havebeen unusual for a scroll whose column height is of average number, twenty-twoto twenty-four; see DJD 29.133. Te second fragment of 4Q428 is much

more tentative because it overlaps with a reconstructed reading of 1QHa5:1920;DJD 29.134.

7/30/2019 31461861

31/35


have been borrowed or appropriated by the community in a number ofways.77 Esther Chazon writes:

Te hundreds of biblical manuscripts from Qumran alert us to thefact that many, if not most, of the approximately 800 Qumran Scrollsfound in these caves were not authoredby the Qumran covenantersbut rather adopted by them.78

Furthermore, in the consistent absence of any explicit sectarian markers,the burden of proof is on those who wish to understand the texts, like

77 In our discussion, reusing a pre-existing composition would include aninterpretive expansion of a particular hymn or its recontextualizing within a liter-ary collection that was used by the yahad, like the collection in 1QHa. Te wis-dom material at Qumran is a good example of texts that seem to have beenappropriated but not necessarily composed by the community. Many studies sug-gest that there is not enough positive evidence to conclude that the sapiential text4QInstruction is a sectarian composition: M. Goff, Te Worldly and HeavenlyWisdom of 4QInstruction (SDJ 50; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2003) 21928; E.J.C.igchelaar, o Increase Learning for the Understanding Ones: Reading and Recon-

structing the Fragmentary Early Jewish Sapiential ext 4QInstruction (SDJ 44;Leiden: E.J. Brill, 2001); D. Harrington, Wisdom exts from Qumran (London:Routledge 1996); Hempel, Te Qumran Sapiential exts and the Rule Books.Other examples of re-using materials include the possible appropriation of a Jew-ish prayer in 7 and 8 of theApostolic Constitutions, see D.A. Fiensy, Prayers Allegedto be Jewish: An Examination of the Constitutiones Apostolorum (BJS 65; Chico:Scholars Press, 1985); and E.G. Chazon, A Prayer Alleged to be Jewish in the

Apostolic Constitutions, Tings Revealed: Studies in Early Jewish and ChristianLiterature in Honor of Michael E. Stone (eds E.G. Chazon, D. Satran, and R.A.

Clements; Leiden/Boston: E.J. Brill, 2004) 26177. As well, Metso presents thedifficulties that arise when dealing with texts that have been revised or reused(Methodological Problems in Reconstructing History, 322):

If various groups were using common sources and borrowing material fromeach other and revising it, how can we identify the specific groups behindthe manuscripts? If large parts of the material included in various manu-scripts are borrowed and modified, how do we make the link between textand history? i.e., what are the criteria that enable us to assign whole manu-scripts to the practice of particular groups (e.g., a celibate community versusa community where marriage was a common practice)?

78 See Chazon, Prayers from Qumran, 271; Chazon, Sectarian Prayer? 317;Newsom, Sectually Explicit Literature from Qumran, 16787.

7/30/2019 31461861

32/35


the ones in 1QHa col. 4, to have been composed at Qumran. Why wouldthe sectarian author choose to use distinctive or sectarian terminology

or theology in other Community Hymns but not in these? While it maybe that poetic compositions prefer to imitate genres rather than innovate,this claim already presumes more about the author of the CommunityHymns than is known for certain; namely, that there is an anonymoussectarian author who is consciously composing in imitation of a literaryform. Perhaps too much is assumed about the authorship of the Commu-nity Hymns when we automatically presume that they were composed bya member of theyahad.

A more nuanced understanding of the Community Hymns may offer abetter understanding of the relationship between the hodayot and otherQumran texts. Te need for a more nuanced understanding of these writ-ings is best illustrated by the recent studies that have examined the rela-tionship of the hodayot to the sapiential texts known as 4QInstruction.Tere are interesting correspondences between the hodayah in col. 5 of1QHa, the wisdom text 4Q417 1 i and also the wo Spirits reatisefrom 1QS.79 Furthermore, scholars have already noted that the phrase,(according to) their knowledge they are glorified each one more than his

fellow ( )80

appears in both 1QHa

18:2930 and4Q418 55 10.Matthew Goff has recently examined the relationship between the hod-

ayot and 4QInstruction, which he and other scholars do not identify assectarian.81 In his study, he has noted the striking resemblances betweenthe specific wisdom elements in 4QInstruction and 1QH with respect tovocabulary and themes. Goff, following orleif Elgvin and Armin Lange,

79

Te correspondence between 1QH 5:126:18 and the wo Spirits treatisewas noted by . Puech, Un hymne essnien en partie retrouv et les Batitudes.1QH V 12VI 18 (col. XIIIXIV 7) et 4QBat, RevQ13 (1988) 5988, here81. For the comparison between 1QH 5 and 4QInstruction see . Elgvin, An

Analysis of 4QInstruction (Ph.D. dissertation: Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1998)16061; also discussed by E.J.C. igchelaar, o Increase Learning for the Under-standing Ones, 203207. igchelaars view is that the relationship between 4QIn-struction is closer to the wo Spirits treatise than to 1QH 5 (207). In hisopinion, the text in 1QH 5 was influenced by both 4QInstruction and woSpirits.

80 igchelaar, o Increase Learning for the Understanding Ones, 206.81 Goff, Reading Wisdom at Qumran, 26388.

7/30/2019 31461861

33/35


dates the composition of 4QInstruction (1Q26, 4Q41518, 423) to theearly part of the second century BCE.82 He begins with the proposal that

others have madethat the wisdom text was a likely source for the authorof the hodayot. In his discussion of the pre-Qumranic origins of that sapi-ential text, he writes that 4QInstruction does not contain any of the red-flag markers of provenance from within theyahadmovement such as theeacher of Righteousness or sectarian use of the word .83 But it shouldbe noted that these red-flag markers are also missing for several compo-sitions in the Community Hymns (like those in 1QHa 4).

Goffs fine study of the relationship between 4QInstruction and thehodayot can help to sharpen our understanding of the CommunityHymns collection. Tere are concentrated areas in the Community Hymnsthat show a much stronger relationship to the sapiential text 4QInstruc-tion than to others: the hodayot in the second LeMaskilgrouping (5:127:20) and the hodayot in the third LeMaskilgrouping (7:2121:4 withoutthe intervening eacher material); in other words, the CommunityHymns that surround the eacher Hymns. Tese are the same clusters ofCommunity Hymns that show signs of sectarian features. Te relationshipbetween the hodayot and other texts from Qumran, both sectarian (e.g.,

1QS) and non-sectarian (e.g., 4QInstruction), is not clear. However, if weaccept Goffs and others important conclusions about the relationshipbetween 4QInstruction and the hodayot, namely that the author of the

82 Goff, Reading Wisdom at Qumran, 268; Elgvin, Priestly Sages? TeMilieus of Origin of 4QMysteries and 4QInstruction, Sapiential Perspectives:Wisdom Literature in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Proceedings of the Sixth Inter-national Symposium of the Orion Center, 2022 May 2001 (eds G. Sterling and

J.

31461861

Documents

Transcript of 31461861