Alleged Basic Meanings of the Hebrew Verb qdš “Be Holy”: An Exercise in Comparative Hebrew Lexicography
Most Hebraists are familiar with the claim that the “basic meaning” of the Hebrew verb qdš is “to separate.” It was adopted by BDB, and is referred to by HALOT. This paper argues that the claim is unlikely to be correct. In searching for the origins and rationale for this claim, which goes back at l...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Brill
2021
|
| In: |
Vetus Testamentum
Year: 2021, Volume: 71, Issue: 4/5, Pages: 481-502 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Holiness
/ Theology
/ Hebrew language
/ Old Testament
|
| IxTheo Classification: | FA Theology HB Old Testament |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Most Hebraists are familiar with the claim that the “basic meaning” of the Hebrew verb qdš is “to separate.” It was adopted by BDB, and is referred to by HALOT. This paper argues that the claim is unlikely to be correct. In searching for the origins and rationale for this claim, which goes back at least to Reuchlin (1505), I encountered some other views propounded by Hebrew lexica of the past 500 years about the “basic meaning” of the root, including “be clean” (e.g., Gesenius, 1833), “begin” (e.g., Buxtorf, 1615) and (surprisingly) “be unclean” (e.g., Pagninus, 1529). These proposals also will be shown to lack adequate support. I will argue that the verb qdš “be holy” and its derivatives have no underlying meaning apart from their denotation of the deity personally and of what belongs to the deity, such as his temple, his priests, his sabbaths, etc. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1568-5330 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Vetus Testamentum
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1163/15685330-00001149 |