The Great Isaiah Scroll 49:4 to 50:1
This is the first page on the 13th strip of leather that makes up the scroll. The page is in good condition with only marginal splitting in the bottom center that extends the crease line up into the first four line from the bottom. Another crease is barely visible in the upper left side of the page. A small amount of material has chipped away from the bottom right margin. There is a blemish in the leather toward the end of line 15 extending across the 2nd from last word and although there is a dark mark over the word it is still easily read. The first letter (beth) in line 23 is faded and difficult to read. as is the middle letter (waw) of the 1st word in line 25.
Paragraphs and Spatiums:
There are 4 paragraphs on this page: in line 5 = 49:7; line 14 = 49:14; line 23 = 49:23 and line 29 = chapter 50:1. There are spatiums that begin in line 1 = 45:5; and line 12 = 49: 13 and line 25 = 49:24 and another in the same line = 49:25; and in line 26 in the middle of verse 49::25.
There are horizontal marks setting off the section 49:6, 7. Encompassing lines 2 to 6. An X marks verse 49:7 as an important verse.
Editorial Additions to the text:
There is a dot over the 3rd from last word in line 7. A dot like this usually indicates the letter is a mistake but this word seems to be spelled properly and is the same as M except for inserted waw discussed in notes under line 7 below. In line 14 where "ve-adonay" is in the text an editor has corrected it and written "ve- 'elohay". above it. and M = "'adonay" Line 26 has yods added over two words .
Q Scribal Spelling:
The Q scribe's use of kah for 2ms and ke and kiy for 2fs suf and pf verb 2 ms tah and 2fs tiy are found on this page. Important places where waw is inserted as a vowel substitute are discussed under line 7 and line 12. The 2fs suf is simply kaph if preceded by a yod or a theoretic vowel and is kiy if preceded by a consonant.
Variations in Q from the Masoretic Text:
Line 1: 6th word: Q = "yotsreyka" part. + suf 2fs (your maker - must refer to Israel as fem but the next reference to same antecedent is masc: see line 2 next to last word ) and M = "yotsriy" part + suf 1cs. (my maker)
Line 3: 5th and 7th words: Q = reversal of order for Jacob and Israel. Q has Israel first and M has Jacob first. M = "tribes of Jacob and Nazarenes of Israel" while Q reads "tribes of Israel and Nazarenes of Jacob" 6th word: Q ="netsiyrey" and M = "netsurey" This important word has mystical meaning when found in Isaiah. The same form in modern Hebrew means "Christians of" (lit Nazarenes). The word is used again as the third from last word in line 7 in a messianic context. See the article on Isaiah's use of the word "Nazar." You will find this one of the most interesting comments on Isaiah in these files. Also see commentary on Isa. 49:6.
Line 4: 3rd word: Q - "qetsey" pl (ends of) and M = "qetse:h" sing (end of).
Line 5: 3rd word: Q = " 'adonay" not in M. 5th word: Q = "go'elekah" noun + suf 2ms (your redeemer) and M = "go'e:l" (redeemer) 8th word: Q = "libze:y" pl. cs. and M = "lebzoh" sing cs. (the hated or despised) 10th word: Q = limta'aviy" (plural form or Q method of showing construct?) and M = "limt'a'e:v."
Line 6: 2nd word: Q = "ra'u" pf 3cs (they shall see) and M = "yir 'u" imp 3mpl (they shall see). 4th and 5th words: Q = 4th word has conj waw not in M and 5th word lacks conj waw in found M and 5th word "yishtachavuu" (they shall worship) is spelled with aleph after initial yod in Q. An unusual spelling. Last word: Q = lacks conj waw found in M.
Line 7: 3rd from last word Q = "ve'e[n]tsorekah" and M = "ve-'e[n]ts-tsa-reka" In both cases verb imp 1cs + suf 2ms. (I will Natsar you) Comment is made here because this is an important word in the text and because it illustrates the use of waw as a vowel substitute which helps in pronunciation. In M the tsade is doubled and therefore there is a vowel vocalization before and following the tsade. The waw is inserted in Q to show there is a vocalization there. M uses a geminative dagesh and a qamets to show the same thing demonstrated by the waw in Q, Please refer to the notes below under line 12. Notice also the mystical use of this word in contexts that include messianic predictions, the name "Yeshuah" and the call of the gentiles and the new covenant.
Line 9: 2nd word: Q = "kol" (all) not in M. and 3rd word: Q ="hariym" (the mountains) and M = "derekiym" (ways). 6th word: Q = "shaph'aiym" (high and bare places) spelled with aleph yod; and M = "shephayiym a different spelling. Q adds aleph to retain the "a" sound after pe.
Line 10: last word Q has a redundant false start of "u-mes" of the next word "u-mesillotay" (my highways) which is complete as the first word on the next line.
Line 12: 1st word: (I have circled the word in red in the text above) In the Masoretic text this word is written as " sameq - yod - nun - yod - mem" It is vocalized in M and the Masoretes recognized the yod as a semi vowel and pointed it as "hiriq yod" which recognizes the yod as a vowel with no consonantal value. The Q text gives this word as "sameq - waw - nun - yod - yod - mem" . In these pages we have called attention to the numerous times that waw is inserted in the text as an alternate of yod. See references to these descriptions on both the Directory page and the Introductory page and the numerous occasions that we made notes on in the preceding pages that show the consistency of using or inserting waw in place of any vowel. If in fact we would note each occurrence of insertion of waw for a vowel sound this document would be too cumbersome. It is possible that Q scribe meant to write a different word than Siniym and wrote something similar to "Seve:niym" but it is more probable that the peculiarities of using waw, that has been consistent with the Q scribes, either as a substitute for yod or for the indication of a vowel is at work here. See the discussion of the name of Hezekiah on page 28 and comments there under line 29 for more on the use of waw as a semi vowel and how it relates to this discussion.
Furthermore, since the "hiriq yod" of "Siyniym" is recognized as a single vowel sound, then it is perfectly consistent with the Q scribes' practices for the insertion of waw here to stand for the "i" sound. This is further indicated by translators who give the English transliteration of the M text as "Sinim" being perfectly aware that there is a hiriq yod at the end of the word they simply put the single vowel "i" for the "hiriq yod;" thus illustrating that a single vowel sound is meant by the yods in this word. Therefore the substituting of waw for the first "hiriq yod" sound is perfectly consistent with the Q scribes' usage
In transcribing the Q reading many modern texts write Seveniym in the footnote as "seve:niym" while the actual Q reading ends the word with a double yod + mem. This is the usual method of denoting nationality in Q as "Kasdiyym" (Chaldeans) and other nationalities are denoted in the same way. See page 18; line 19: 3rd word and page 38, line 25: 2nd word. for 2 or the 64 examples where Chaldean nationality, not place is denoted by the use of the double yod in Q. Thus it is plain that the Q scribe referred to a nationality and not to a place. It more likely refers to "the land of the Chinese" as Gesenius and others suggest, than to the land of Aswan.
A reader who had received a long explanation as to why Aswan should be in the text at this place asked my opinion of the letter. I add here the answer I sent to him:
I am not a "scholar" but I read Hebrew and have a small degree of ability to speak the language. Thus I often find fault with "scholars" who know all the grammatical terms for the printed text but with rare exception can not even answer the vocal question "ha-'im atah me-daber 'ivrit?" (Do you speak Hebrew?) Fluency in the language gives me an advantage because I am familiar with "idiom" in the language. You do not have to be a "scholar" to understand language. If you know the language. Perhaps you speak Chinese. Do you need a scholar to tell you what a simple sentence means in Chinese?
In any case your writer says that the word in Isa 49:12, also appears in Eze 29:10, Eze 30:6. This simply is not the case. Strong's concordance does not accept the relationship of the roots of "s'veneh" in Ezek and "sin" in Isaiah. They are two different words.
I am sometimes at a loss to explain why translators make mistakes but there are reasons here. Often when one makes a mistake those who follow continue the same mistake. There may very well have been a town in South Egypt named S'veneh but the translation of the Hebrew in Ezek 29:10 that says "from the tower to Seneh" is simply incorrect. The passage in Hebrew is exactly what the KJV renders: "from the tower of S'veneh to the border of Ethiopia" is an indisputable rendition of the literal Hebrew text and any other rendition is an INTERPRETIVE translation. Probably based on the LXX which has the rendering that says "from the Tower and Suenes to ( or until) the border of Ethiopia." (But even in the LXX this puts Suenes at the opposite extemity to Ethiopia, not on its border.) The "scholars" have put other things and their own idea into the Hebrew text and have not rendered the words from Hebrew to English as the KJV has and I just did.
The Hebrew text in both Ezekiel passages plainly say "from the tower of S'veneh." not "from the tower to S'veneh" That is an interpretation not a translation.
Listing names of people who accept the mistake does not change the text. It is still the same in Hebrew. In Hebrew therefore the tower of S'veneh is at the other extreme from the border of Ethiopia and therefore can not be Asswan.
The Hebrew text of Ezekiel 30:6 says of the "tower of S'veneh" that the Egyptian's pride shall "fall in it". "IT" is the tower of S'veneh. There are some linguistic complexities which I will try to explain that are at work here in the route the scholars take to go from "S'veneh" and arrive as "Syene": The V is this word is a Hebrew waw and is a semi vowel. It is either a consonant (v or w) or a vowel (u or o) It can not be both. It is either a vowel or a consonant in this word. If it is a vowel then there is no V is the word. As a vowel in later times (Dead Sea Scroll times) the waw was used as a sign of a vowel, any vowel and it could be and frequently was substituted for a yod which is also a semivowel. Keep this in mind as the "Sin" in Isa 49:12 could therefore be related (in this way as these scholars say) to the "Suneh" of Ezekiel 29:10 if you substitute yod for waw and drop the "h." Do you follow so far? Next: the "h" on the end of a word in Hebrew, particularly a place can mean "toward" (It is a locative "he". For instance Jerusalem is yerushalayim and going to Jerusalem often is "going yerushalaymah." As noted this adds another syllable to the word. I hope you can follow this. It is not that complex. Next
Thus in "S'veneh" some one might take the "h" to be locative and translate it "to S'ven." or (using the waw as a vowel) "Son" or "Syn." This is route "scholars" take. Notice the Masoretic scholars did not take it as such. The waw is considered a consonant by them In fact some of the translators use it as a consonant. IT, therefore according the masorah, can not be "toward Sin" in Ezekiel. Why? The Masoretes also pointed the word so that the "he is part of the word and is not (in the Masoretic text) a directional "h" but is part of the root of the word. They also point the waw so the waw is a consonant. Using all these complexities and more, while ignoring the masorah, results in the "scholarly" rendering of "S'veneh" as "Syene" in some translations that favor Asswan. The "he" is dropped off and the waw becomes a "y" and in that round about way the attempt is made to relate the word to "syn" of Isa 49:12. However the Masoretes saw the waw as a consonant and pointed it with a vowel. To them it can not be Syn but Svnh as the name of a place.
As above: the use of waw as a sign of any vowel sound was not used as early as Ezekiel so the substitution of yod or Y for waw is very unlikely in the verses in Ezekiel.
But further complicating this word is the fact that the DSS scribes did use waw for any vowel and in this word in Isa 49:12 they inserted a waw to stand for the yod that is in the Masoretic text. I have fully explained this in my article above on this verse. It is plain that the waw above in this verse is a vowel but in the Ezekiel passages it is a consonant.
See also my comments on this verse in my Isaiah commentary.
Line 16: 3rd from last word: Q = "se'iy" imper. fem s. (lift up)_ spelled with same and M = same spelled with sin.
Line 20: last word: Q = conj. waw not found in M.
Line 21: 2nd word: Q lacks conj waw found in M. 5th word: Q = "hineh" and M = "he:n"
Line 22: 1st two words: Q = "kiy' tsivah" (for he commands) and M = "koh 'amar" (Thus says)
Line 23: 1st word: Q = a faded beth which makes the first word difficult to read. otherwise the same as M. 6th word. Q = a misspelling and aleph is missing from "tinase'nah" v. imp 3fpl (they shall be carried)
Line 25: 7th word: Q = " 'arits" (terror stricken) and M = "tsadiyq" (lawful).
Line 26: 7 words to Spatium:
Q = Q reads: " Also the one taken by the hero shall be taken [back] and the captivity of the terrible one shall be delivered."
M = M reads: "Also the captivity of a hero shall be taken and the one taken by a terrible one shall be delivered."
Line 27: 4th word: Q = same word as M but qal imp 1cs and M = additional initial "he" of 5th stem 1cs.
Line 29: 4th from last word: Q = notice "miy" spelled without the usual aleph Q scribes append to this word.