qere blank in Hebrew

[Kristin]

Could someone please explain this? 

 

Thanks,

Kristin

 

[Brian K. Mitchell]

6 hours ago, Kristin said:

Could someone please explain this?

This means that there is no קרי(Qere / read) for אִם there is only the כתיב (K'tiv /writen) for אִם and furthermore other Hebrew manuscripts of Ruth from the Middle Ages also do not have a קרי(Qere) at verse 12. If you have the BHS in print turn to page 1323 look at verse 12 of Ruth chapter 3 and notice the מסורה קטנה (Masorah Katana or Parva) written on the right hand margin here by the בַּעֲלֵי הַמָּסוֹרָה (Masoretes) you will notice that they tells us that this one of 8 times were a word is to be written and not read. 

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Brian K. Mitchell

[Brian K. Mitchell]

Here is a picture of the Masorah Parva / Masorah Katana of the BHS on page 1323

and it reads אִם חד מן ח̇ כת̇ ולא קר̇    “The word אִם is one of 8 words which are to be written but not to be read”

 

Naturally, you might want to know where the other occurrences are, right.

Well, you are in luck!

 

The beautiful Accordance Masorah Thesaurus module lists all 8 times of the occurrence of the 'write not read' phenomenon:

 

 

The electronic version of Weil, Gérard. E's Massorah Gedolah: Manuscrit B. 19a de Léningrad. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum, 2001 from Logos also list all 8 occurrences this way.

 

 

At first sight Logos Massorah Gedolah might look more helpful since there is some English verse references on the side, However, Accordance's Masorah Thesaurus module has much more ... so much more. For example If you enter Ruth 3:12 you will get three different list on the verse. But, that's not all! The Masorah Thesaurus is not based only on one manuscript, rather the creators of it looked at multiple manuscripts and Masorah, on the other hand the Massorah Gedolah is based only on the Leningrad Codex and it is also a high edited version of the Leningrad codex's Masorah. Okay, it is good, helpful and fun to have both! 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Brian K. Mitchell

[Brian K. Mitchell]

Just in case someone does not know what the Qere and Ketiv are here is a simple definition.

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Quote

Qere and Ketiv, from the Aramaic qere or q're, קְרֵי‎ ("[what is] read") and ketiv, or ketib, kethib, kethibh, kethiv, כְּתִיב‎ ("[what is] written"), also known as "q're uchsiv" or "q're uchtiv," refers to a system for marking differences between what is written in the consonantal text of the Hebrew Bible, as preserved by scribal tradition, and what is read. In such situations, the qere is the technical orthographic device used to indicate the pronunciation of the words in the Masoretic text of the Hebrew language scriptures (Tanakh), while the ketiv indicates their written form, as inherited from tradition.

[Kristin]

Hi @Brian K. Mitchell,

Thank you for all this detailed information. I really appreciate it. If you don't mind, I have another question, specifically, what the point of the read even is. On the surface it seems like people should just read what is written, so I continued your wikipedia article concerning the "Interpretation and significance" and if I am understanding correctly, the qere is based off of tradition?

 

So for example that section included Gen 12:8 stating, "And he [Abram] moved from there to the mountain east of Beit-Eil and set up his tent (ketiv/written: her tent); Beit-Eil was in the west and Ai in the east. He built an altar there to the Lord and called in the name of the Lord." The point is that the Hebrew SAYS "her" but the Rabbis have concluded that the fundamental point of the text is "his" and so thus when reading it "his" should be stated? Am I understanding this correctly?

[Brian K. Mitchell]

8 minutes ago, Kristin said:

what the point of the read even is. On the surface it seems like people should just read what is written,

There are a few reason

One when we come across the Tetragrammaton i.e. יהוה‎ we don't read it as is but rather we read אֲדֹנָי(Lord). If you have an audio Hebrew Bible you can notice that in general you will hear אֲדֹנָי most time when יהוה‎ is written. This is the Qere perpetuum or the "perpetual" Qere. This tradition is carried on in most English translations of the Old Testament/Tanakh where we find the title LORD even though what is behind the translation is the word יהוה‎ which has a very different meaning than Lord.

 

Two, today we can make perfect or virtual perfect copies with computers, copy machines, and the print press, but long ago scribes were in charge of writing scrolls and the codices of the Hebrew Bible. Because scribes are human they of course will sometimes make mistakes that is how some typos and small errors came into some of the manuscripts. Much later when the Masoretes inherited the ancient texts they decided that whenever they came across what they believe to be errors they would refrain from fixing them, and instead write the corrections in margins of the texts. This is where the tradition of Qere and Ketiv is thought to have started.

 

Three, a lot of the Qere and Ketiv are about spelling issues, pronunciation, intonation, and cantillation(how the text is to be sung or chanted). Think of issues in English like Color Vs Colour and how two people can say 'tomato' and 'often' is two different ways. 

 

Four  there are times in the text where something is said that was considered to be naughty or even might lead readers to blasphemy and at those times there may be a different reading for what was read. The Masoretes recoded information like that and more.

 

Also we do not know if the Masoretes(maybe late 5th century) were the Rabbis or if they were of the Karaites sect of Judaism (7th/8th) or if they were simply a their own group. I personally do not believe the Rabbanite Judaism is responsible for the creation of the Qere and Ketiv I think the Rabbis either inherited it from one of the many groups of Judaism that co-existed with it in the early centuries and in my opinion most likely the once very influential Karaite sect of Judaism.

 

54 minutes ago, Kristin said:

but the Rabbis have concluded

No, rather a 15th century French Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki better know as Rashi wrote a commentary on the Pentateuch/Torah were he interprets the Qere and Ketiv in the way the wikipedia article mentions. Also, later Shabbethai ben Joseph Bass attempted to rationalize both Rashi commentary and the Genesis 12:8 to mean that Abram set up Sarah's tent first so the text as is is correct in saying her, and the qere is correct in saying his because both belong to Abram.  

 

Now, as for the Qere and Ketiv of Genesis 12:8 this was the work of the Masoretes not the Rabbis. The Masoretes concluded that there was a grammatical mistake or typo in the text but they refrained from correcting the written text directly and placed what they felt should have been written or should be read in the margins of the text however they basically left this up to the readers digression.  

 

The early Rabbis were concerned with the oral law/Tradition what we now know as the Mishnah, Talmud, Shulchan Aruch, and such. However the Masoretes were focused on guarding the text of scripture and recording all kinds of data about scripture which is why the Hebrew Bible is called the Masoretic Text! The Masorah is much more than just the Qere and Ketiv, they also counted every letter of every book in the Bible, commented on spelling, intonation, syntaxt, paragraph divisions, letter and word statistics. 

[Brian K. Mitchell]

About the Qere/Ketiv Notes

Quote

When the Masoretes considered a word or form to be incorrect they still retained the canonical consonantal text (Ketib “written”) but noted in the margin the form they considered correct (Qere “to be read”)

Reinhard Wonneberger, Understanding BHS: A Manual for the Users of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 2nd rev. ed., vol. 8, Subsidia Biblica (Roma: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1990), 65.

 

 

Kethibh and Qere.

Quote

In some cases (anything from about 1,000 to 1,500), the Hebrew text instructs the reader to ignore what is written (kethibh) and to read (qere) what it says in the margin. In most cases the consonants remain intact but the vowels change to give a different meaning. Kethibh/qere is used for a variety of reasons, including the need to avoid profanation (as with the *Tetragrammaton), to correct error or to offer a euphemism.

Alec Gilmore, “Kethibh and Qere,” A Concise Dictionary of Bible Origins and Interpretation (London; New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 108.

 

 

Quote

 

Qere/Ketiv notes occur in situations where the reading tradition, the traditionally accepted pronunciation, differs from the pronunciation which the letters of the text would normally suggest. In order to avoid errors in reading, the Masoretes developed the Qere notes to instruct the reader regarding what is proper to be read for a particular text.

The Qere/Ketiv notes may very well be the most problematic issue in Masoretic studies, and a tremendous amount of literature has been generated on the questions involved. No one is certain how these notes originated or what was the basis for the difference between the Qere and the Ketiv. The problem is complicated by the fact that there is no unified body of Qere/Ketiv notes marked in manuscripts, and there were various methods for marking the notes and the proper pronunciation of the Qere. The instructions below represent the method in BHS, which is also usual practice among other printed editions and manuscripts.

Qere is Aramaic for “read,” indicating what should be read. Ketiv is Aramaic for “written,” denoting what is written in the text. In BHS, the Ketiv is written in the text, just as any other word. A circule is printed above the word. The Ketiv is pointed with the vowels that belong with the Qere. The consonants of the Qere are given in the margin with the other Mp notes. These consonants are printed above the letter ק̇ (which stands for Qere). The reader must associate the consonants in the margin with the vowels in the text. Thus, in form and system the Qere/Ketiv notes are very similar to the other Mp notes. The distinguishing factor for the Qere/Ketiv notes is the Qere marker ק̇ in the margin.

 

 

Page H. Kelley, Daniel S. Mynatt, and Timothy G. Crawford, The Masorah of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: Introduction and Annotated Glossary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 11.

 

 

 

Kethibh and Qere

Quote

 

The masoretes were extremely loath to undertake emendations of the text, but called attention to probable corruptions by suggesting in their notes what they considered the correct reading. These readings are accompanied by a קִ or קדֹ, that is, qere, that which is to be called or read in place of what is written. The latter is termed the kethibh. Thus in the margin at Josh. 8:11* we read ביניו with a קֹ beneath it. This means that in place of בֵּינָו the form בֵּינָיו is to be read. The vowel pointings for the qere form are given under the kethibh. Certain words are known as perpetual qeres. Thus הִוא is read הִיא throughout the Pentateuch. The tetragrammaton יְהוָֹה is usually to be read אֲדֹנָי. Likewise the perpetual qere for the kethibh יְרוּשָׁלֵם is יְרוּשָׁלַםִ; for יִשָּׂשׁכָר, the perpetual qere is יִשָּׂכָר.

 

 

Frederick W. Danker, Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, Rev. and expanded ed. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1993), 54.

 

[Kristin]

Hi @Brian K. Mitchell,

Thank you very much for your detailed explanation. That was extremely helpful!

 

Take care,

Kristin

[Brian K. Mitchell]

@Kristin You are very welcomed!

 

A few last thoughts....

 

Oral tradition in Reading:

Hebrew and Arabic even in modern times are usually written only with consonants. Where words are accented and what vowels each word has are supplied orally by readers. In way this is an ongoing oral tradition (Children books, some poems, and Bibles are printed with vowels). In English we write vowels and consonants but we usually do not added accent marks to written words. When we read texts in English we supply accents by memory or by our oral tradition or dialect of English. in Japanese each individual kanji (Chinese characters) can have multiple pronunciations so when one reads these pronunciations are usually supplied by memory and experience with Japanese. Sometimes phonetic script called Hiragana/Furigana are written above Kanji that are rare or in children's books. 

 

The work of the Masoretes.

When we open a Masoretic edition of the Hebrew Bible we can see both the text the Masoretes received and the text that the Masoretes corrected and annotated. This is I think is a lot more assuring than if we only had a text that the Masoretes edited and manufactured for us. 

 

Grace and Peace And Have a great day

[Ben Denckla]

@Brian K. Mitchell Thanks for your detailed responses. For most of what you say, I either agree with it, or am not expert enough to agree or disagree with it. But I take some issue with this small part:

 

Quote

Three, a lot of the Qere and Ketiv are about spelling issues, pronunciation, intonation, and cantillation (how the text is to be sung or chanted). Think of issues in English like Color Vs Colour and how two people can say 'tomato' and 'often' is two different ways. 

 

I don't see how a ketiv/qere can arise from anything having to do with cantillation. Indeed, more broadly, I don't see how a ketiv/qere can arise from anything having to do with pointing in general, as long as that pointing can fit the letters of the unpointed tradition. To be clear, by "pointing" I mean anything that "decorates" the letters and whitespace: a vowel mark below a letter, a ḥolam dot, a dagesh, a shuruq dot (looks like a dagesh), a meteg, a maqaf, or a cantillation mark. (I hope that list is exhaustive, but I'm not sure.)

 

As for the spelling and pronunciation issues you mention, it seems to me that a ketiv/qere can only arise from a spelling or pronunciation issue inasmuch as that issue has bearing on the letters or whitespace. (I mention whitespace because in rare cases, I think a ketiv/qere arises from a different way of splitting up the same letters, i.e. a difference in where the space falls within the same sequence of letters.)

 

I do not know what Gilmore means in your quote, "In most cases [of ketiv/qere] the consonants remain intact but the vowels change to give a different meaning." I don't know what Gilmore means by "vowels" and "consonants." This terminology, though widespread, is, though often clear from context, sometimes frustratingly ambiguous, since "consonants" is sometimes used as a synonym for "letters" and of course pointed Hebrew can represent a vowel SOUND with only a vowel mark, or with both a vowel mark and a letter functioning as that vowel. If by "consonants" Gilmore means "letters" and by "vowels" Gilmore means "vowel marks," then his statement reduces to the following, which is false: "In most cases [of ketiv/qere] the letters remain intact but the vowel marks change to give a different meaning." There is no need for a ketiv/qere in such a case.

 

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by intonation as distinct from cantillation. Or maybe you don't mean intonation to be distinct from cantillation, i.e. you are just calling out intonation as a specific aspect of cantillation.

 

[Brian K. Mitchell]

15 hours ago, Benjamin Denckla said:

I don't see how a ketiv/qere can arise from anything having to do with cantillation.

Okay, let me explain my rational...........

 

"Cantillation is the ritual chanting of prayers and responses. It often specifically refers to Jewish Hebrew cantillation. Cantillation sometimes refers to diacritics used in texts that are to be chanted in liturgy." (Wikipedia)

 

"Cantillation (from the Latin cantare, meaning “to sing”) is the practice of chanting from the biblical books in the Jewish canon." (link)

 

When a baal keriah or Cantor (a person who does the public cantillation) comes to the weekly parashiyot he is usually presented with the unpointed text of the Sefer Torah (Pentateuch) that contains only the ketiv and maybe also a Tikkun korim (a book which contains the pointed text of the Torah in addition to the unpointed text). However, the Baal Keriah cantillates the text according to the qere rather than the Ketiv when the two disagree. The qere does not deal with the diacritics or the Te'amim, but the qere is non-the-less necessity when it comes to the public cantillation of scripture.

 

15 hours ago, Benjamin Denckla said:

I don't know what Gilmore means by "vowels" and "consonants."

I assume that by vowels the niqqudot are what are primarily meant, Gilmore might also have in mind the אם קריאה (Matres lectionis) and as an extension

also perhaps issues of יתר וחסר (Plene and defective) readings. Whatever the case my point in quoting Gilmore and the others was simply to provide example how a range of various people with different opinions have defined the Ketiv and Qere. 

 

 

16 hours ago, Benjamin Denckla said:

Finally, I'm not sure what you mean by intonation as distinct from cantillation. Or maybe you don't mean intonation to be distinct from cantillation, i.e. you are just calling out intonation as a specific aspect of cantillation.

 

Early by Cantillation I refer in general to the act of reading or chanting scripture. 

 

Intonation is of course part of that but I mean phonology...

 

"The te’amim of the Tiberian system, which are given above or below each word in a printed Hebrew Bible, serve three functions: they indicate the accented syllable (phonology), the phrasing of the text (prosody), and the melodic motif for each word. Some of the Tiberian te’amim are conjunctive, indicating a text-phrase that continues onward, and some are disjunctive, indicating the end of a text-phrase. The disjunctive te’amim divide each verse once, then again, and again—with up to four levels, depending on the length and complexity of the verse (Dresher 1994, 2013; Jacobson 2002 and 2013; Kogut 1994, 18–27).[8] The phrasing and accentuation of the text of course affects meaning, as almost all commentators have noted." (Link2)

 

Regards & Grace and Peace,

                                          Brian

[Ben Denckla]

Thanks @Brian K. Mitchell I think I understand a little better now what you meant. Certainly ketiv/qere is related to cantillation in the sense that it is the qere that is chanted. I was thinking of it more narrowly: ketiv/qere is unrelated to cantillation in the sense that the "dispute" giving rise to a ketiv/qere is never a dispute about cantillation.

[Brian K. Mitchell]

@Benjamin Denckla thank you for asking and allowing me to clarify. Looking back I think I should have been a little bit more clear.