PUNISHMENT OF THE OFFENDING ORGAN IN BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vetus Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

Punishment of the Offending Organ in Biblical Literature Author(s): Yael Shemesh Source: Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 55, Fasc. 3 (Jul., 2005), pp. 343-365Published by: BrillStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20503923Accessed: 23-03-2016 15:03 UTC

REFERENCESLinked references are available on JSTOR for this article:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20503923?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 83.137.211.198 on Wed, 23 Mar 2016 15:03:36 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/publisher/bap

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20503923

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20503923?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



PUNISHMENT OF THE OFFENDING ORGAN IN BIBLICAL LITERATURE

by

YAEL SHEMESH Ramat-Gan, Israel

I. Introduction

The principle of "measure for measure" is a golden thread that runs through every genre in the Bible.' Here I shall focus on one version thereof that does not seem to have been considered before: the idea that it is the offending organ that is punished.

This idea can be found in various cultures and literary genres. It is stated explicitly in the apocryphal Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,

in Gad's report on how he was punished for what he did to Joseph:

For God brought upon me a disease of the liver.... For by what things a man transgresses, by the same he is also punished. Since, therefore, my liver was set mercilessly against Joseph, I was judged mercilessly, suffering in my liver for eleven months, for so long a time as I was at enmity with Joseph, until he was sold.2

The talmudic sages, too, expressed this principle with regard to the fate of biblical figures:

Samson followed his eyes [where they led him], therefore, the Philistines put out his eyes, since it is said, 'And the Philistines laid hold on him and put out his eyes' (Judg. xvi 21). Absalom was proud of his hair,

* I would like to thank Lenn Schramm and Dr. Shimon Bar-Efrat for their help ful comments and suggestions.

1 See Y. Shemesh, "Measure for Measure in the David Stories," SJOT 17 (2003), pp. 89-109, esp. p. 89, nn. 1-6.

2 The Testament of Gad v 9-11, in The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary, H. W. Hollander and M. de Jonge (eds.) (Leiden, 1985), p. 328. Here we have another expression of the principle of measure for measure?a numerical correspondence between the duration of the sin and the duration of the punishment. This principle can be found in the Bible with regard to the sin of the Spies (Num. xiv 28).

? Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2005 Vetus Testamentum LV,3 Also available online - www.brill.nl



344 YAEL SHEMESH

therefore, he was hung by his hair [II Sam. xiv 25-26]. (M Sotah 1,8 [ed. J. Neusner])

In the New Testament we encounter the idea that a person should put out the eye that led him astray or cut off the offending hand or leg, because it is better to enter eternal life lacking a limb than to be cast into Hell with an intact body.3

In antiquity, the custom of Athens, Cyprus, and Thebes was to cut off the right hand of a suicide and bury it separately.4 It seems plau sible that this was construed as condign punishment of the offending limb. This, in fact, is how Josephus Flavius explains it:

In other nations the law requires that a suicide's right hand, with which

he made war on himself, should be cut off, holding that, as the body was unnaturally severed from the soul, the hand should be severed from the body.5

The legal literature of the ancient Near East provides many exam ples of the principle of punishing the offending limb.6 It can also be found in Beduin law.7 Even today, the notion that the limb that trans gresses must bear the brunt of the punishment is applied in a num ber of Muslim countries Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan:8 in those countries, a man convicted of theft suffers amputation of his hand, as stipulated in the Koran:

As for the thief, male and female, cut off their hands as a recompense for what they have piled up a chastisement from Allah. (Surah V [The

TableJ1, v. 42)9

3 Matt, v 29-30, xviii 8-9; Mark ix 43-48. 4 E. Durkheim, Suicide: A Study in Sociology, trans. J. A. Spaulding and G. Simpson,

ed. with an introduction by G. Simpson (London, 1952), pp. 329-330. 5 The Jewish War, III 8, 5, trans. H. St. J. Thackeray (London, 1927), vol. 2, p. 683. 6 See P. D. Miller, Jr., Sin and Judgment in the Prophets: A Stylistic and Theological Analysis

(Chico, Cal, 1982), pp. 108-109; and in greater detail, Y. Shemesh, '"Measure for Measure' in Biblical Law, Compared to the Laws of the Ancient Near East and Bedouin Law" (Hebrew), Beit Mikra 161 (2000), pp. 164-165.

7 Ibid, pp. 165-166. 8 See S. S. Souryal and D. W. Potts, "The Penalty of Hand Amputation for Theft

in Islamic Justice," Journal of Criminal Justice 22 (1994), pp. 249-265, esp. p. 264 n. 3, concerning modern-day application of the Quranic law.

9 The Qur'?n, ed. Richard Bell (Edinburgh, 1937), vol. 1, p. 99.



PUNISHMENT OF THE OFFENDING ORGAN 345

II. Punishment of the offending organ in the Bible

The principle that the offending organ suffers the punishment can be found in all genres of biblical literature narrative, legal code, prophetic literature, poetry, and the wisdom literature.

1. Narrative

1.1 The eyes

We begin with the talmudic example of Samson, cited above. After the Philistines overcame Samson they put out his eyes (Judg. xvi 21). This is not the only biblical case where a captured enemy is blinded. In fact, victors seem to have treated the vanquished this way in order to humiliate or punish them (1 Sam. xi 2; 2 Kings xxv 7). With Samson, however, there may be another significance, noted by the sages: "Samson followed his eyes [where they led him], therefore, the Philistines put out his eyes." A literary analysis of the story focusing on the use of the root r.'.h "saw" for Samson's relationships with Philistine women, supports this reading:'0 "at Timnah he saw one of the daughters of the Philistines" (Judges xiv 1"); "I saw one of the daughters of the Philistines at Timnah" (ibid. 2); "Samson went to Gaza, and there he saw a harlot, and he went in to her" (ibid. xvi 1). What is more, the noun 'ayin "eye" is used twice in the context of Samson's decision to marry the woman from Timnah: responding to his parents' rebuke that he prefers to marry a Philistine rather than a woman from his own people, Samson refuses to yield and tells his father, "Get her for me; for she pleases me well (lit., she is right in

my eyes) [r:'93 MZItW R"iF-'Z]" (Judg. xiv 3). The narrator confirms this: "she pleased Samson well (lit., she was right in Samson's eyes) [Vitlr liW'ttZ '28']" (ibid., 7). This marriage to the Timnite woman, who was pleasing to his eyes, led to the increasing hostility between him and the Philistines and triggered sequence of revenge attacks on both sides, of which the penultimate stage is Samson's capture and blinding by

10 See J. Jacobs, "Measure for Measure as Literary and Ideological Tool in the Biblical Storytelling" (Hebrew), (Ph.D. dissertation, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 2002), pp. 100-102.

11 All translations are according to RSV, unless otherwise specified. Chapter-verse references are to MT; the RSV reference, where different, is added in parentheses.



346 YAEL SHEMESH

the Philistines. If this interpretation is correct, the Philistines unwit tingly serve as a divine instrument to punish Samson.

1.2 The heart

The Lord warns Pharaoh, "For this time I will send all my plagues

uponyour heart, and upon your servants and your people, that you may know that there is none like me in all the earth" (Ex. ix 14). Some

have proposed emending 7n5-tR to 7n Mb*, i.e., "these plagues upon ou."'2 But in light of the crucial role that Pharaoh's heart plays in his conduct time and again we read that Pharaoh hardened his heart and refused to let the Israelites go'3 -the Masoretic text seems prefer able: the Lord will strike Pharaoh precisely in the organ that perpet uates his transgression his heart.'4 In this case we are not dealing with a concrete punishment directed at the physical heart, but with figurative language only.

Punishment of the heart may also be indicated in the story 'of Nabal the Carmelite. When, after he has sobered up, Abigail informs him of her meeting with David, he suffers what is evidently a cerebral hem orrhage and becomes paralyzed. '5 The narrator refers this physical impairment to Nabal's heart: "his heart died within him, and he became as a stone" (1 Sam. xxv 37). Although the story never refers explic itly to Nabal's hard heart in association with his sin, the Bible is replete

12 Thus, for example, P. Hyatt, Exodus (NCB; London, 1971), p. 118. 13 Ex. vii 13, 14, 22; viii 11, 15, 28; ix 7, 34, 35, et passim. This is not the place

to deal with the theological problem of the Lord's declaration that He is hardening Pharaoh's heart (Ex. iv 21; vii 3, 22; ix 12 et passim).

14 This assumption is strengthened by the fact that the Lord's words incorporate another manifestation of measure for measure, by means of a common verb: The Lord demands that Pharaoh "Let my people go (rfpE?)" (v. 13); should he refuse, "this time I will send (JlbiD "ON) all my plagues upon your heart" (v. 14). The principle of mea sure for measure through this verb was noted by U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Exodus, trans. I. Abrahams (Jerusalem, 1967), p. 114. He did not, however, discern the principle that the offending limb suffers the punishment. See also Lev. xxvi 15~16: "If you spurn my statutes, and if your soul (DD0S3) abhors my ordinances ... I will do this to you: I will appoint over you sudden terror, consumption, and fever that waste the eyes and cause life to pine away (I?SJ rDHQ)".

15 See, for example Q. H. W. Wolf, Anthropologie des Alten Testaments (Munich, 1973), p. 69; S. Bar-Efrat, / Samuel: Introduction and Commentary (Hebrew) (Mikra LeYisra'el; Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, 1996), p. 324. As Bar-Efrat explains, "in antiquity the heart was deemed the seat of processes that actually belong to the brain. . . . Thus paralysis, whose source is in the brain, was viewed as the death of the heart." (See also Wolf, Anthropologie, pp. 77-78).




with metaphorical uses of the heart as the seat of the emotions,'6 the location of the conscience,'7 the ethical center,'8 and the seat of all human vices.'9 In light of these, as well as the extremely unflattering characterization of Nabal (including explicit statements by the narra tor [v. 3], one of his servants [v. 17], and his wife [v. 25]), his pun ishment is meant to stimulate an immediate association with the hard heartedness he displays toward David and his men.20 What is more, the heart's main function, for the Bible, is as the noetic center.2' Nabal's

refusal to help David is evidence of his lack of wisdom and long-term perspective. Even his name, Nabal, has the sense of "foolish, sense less, [used] especially of the man who has no perception of ethical and religious claims."22 Nabal the Carmelite is "lacking in sense"

as the death of his heart within him highlights very well. Another reference to punishment of the heart occurs in Daniel's

words to Belshazzar concerning his father Nebuchadnezzar: because the latter grew haughty ("his heart was lifted up [Mi;; MI]"), he has been pulled down from his throne and expelled from human society,

and his heart has sunk to the level of the beasts ("his mind [M;;b] was made like that of a beast") (Dan. v 20-21).

16 See Wolf, Anthropologie, pp. 74-76; H.-J. Fabry, "2b} l?b," Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. J. Botterweck, H. Ringgern, and H.-J. Fabry, trans. D. E.

Green, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, Michigan 1995), pp. 408, 414-419. See, for example, Cant, iii 11; Lam. v 15; Ps. xxxvii 4; Prov. xv 13.

17 Wolf, Anthropologie, p. 85; Fabry, "l?b," Theological Dictionary, p. 409. See, for exam ple, 2 Sam. xxiv 10; 2 Chron. xxxiv 27.

18 Fabry, "l?b," Theological Dictionary, p. 408. 19 Ibid, pp. 426-429. See, for example, "For the fool (p22) speaks folly, and his mind

plots iniquity CpNTTOir 13*7*1)" (Isa. xxxii 6), as well as the collocations "uncircumcised in heart" (Ezek. xliv 7), "an evil heart" (Prov. xxv 20, xxvi 23), and "stony heart" (Ezek. xi 19, xxxvi 26).

20 In fact, Nabal's heart is first mentioned not in reference to his comeuppance but, one verse earlier, to his intoxication: "Nabal's heart was merry within him, for he was very drunk" (1 Sam. xxv 36). The description is meant ironically: the heart of this "ill behaved" man (v. 3) is merry because he has eaten and drunk heavily to celebrate the shearing of his sheep, even while refusing to share his bounty with David and his men (v. 11). But his merry heart will soon die within him, when he hears his wife's report of her meeting with David.

21 Wolf, Anthropologie, pp. 79-84; Fabry, "l?b," Theo logical Dictionary, pp. 408, 419-423. See, for example, the collocations "an understanding mind (PQ? "3"?)" (1 Kings iii 9), "a wise and discerning mind (f?J) DDn *3"?)" (ibid. 12); and, with a negative sense, "lacking in sense" (*3"7~"10n) (Prov. xi 12, xv 21, et passim). I would like to thank Prof. Arie van der Kooij for calling my attention to this sense of the word lev.

22 BDB, p. 614. See also, for example, Deut. xxxii 6; Job ii 10; Prov. xvii 21.



348 YAEL SHEMESH

1.3 Hands, arms, and legs

The clearest example of the punishment of an offending limb is the fate of Jeroboam:

And when the king heard the saying of the man of God, which he cried against the altar at Bethel, Jeroboam stretched out his hand from the altar, saying, "Lay hold of him." And his hand, which he stretched out against him, dried up, so that he could not draw it back to himself. (1 Kings xiii 4)

Punishment of an offending arm may be found in the doom pro nounced to Eli by the Man of God: "Behold, the days are coming, when I will cut off your strength and the strength of your father's house

(T,nn rn D r-sfI n 7i .sY-rnS TIr)" (1 Sam. ii 31). Here, clearly, Ut arm is to be understood metaphorically (as all the translators do; see also Jeremiah xlviii 25;23 Job xxii 8, "the man with power [ilt r't ] possessed the land"; and many other passages). It seems to me, how ever, that here the figurative language also expresses the notion that the offending limb must bear the brunt of the punishment, for the arm played a major role in the sin of Eli's sons. They sent their ser vants to exact a contribution from the sacrificial offerings: "When any man offered sacrifice, the priest's servant would come, while the meat was boiling, with a three-pronged fork in his hand, and .., all that the fork brought up the priest would take for himself" (1 Sam. ii 13-14); "you must give it now; and if not, I will take it by force" (ibid. 16). As punishment for this strong-arn behavior, the House of Eli was pun ished by having its arm its strength broken and cut off. Although the description of the sin does not specifically refer to the arm, it does locate the greedy fork in the servant's hand, which is of course part of the arm,24 and twice employs the verb take: and the hand and arm, of course, are the organs of taking.

An offending leg is punished in the story of Balaam. The third time that his ass sees the angel, it presses against the wall and inflicts pain on the prophet: "She pushed against the wall, and pressed Balaam's

23 Where all the classical translations render IH? literally ("his arm") but the New JPS renders it metaphorically ("his strength").

24 Compare Job xxxi 21-22: "If I have raised my hand against the fatherless, because I saw help in the gate; then let my shoulder blade fall from my shoulder, and let my arm be broken from its socket." Here too the sin refers to "hand" and the punish ment to the "shoulder" and "arm." On Job xxxi 21-22, see below, ?5.4.




foot against the wall" (Num. xxii 25). Balaam's transgression is that he is going with the Moabite lords to curse the Israelites, as can be learned from the Lord's reaction to his expedition: "God's anger was kindled because he went" (Num. xxii 22). The recurring use of the verb h.1.k, in the repeated question of whether Balaam will journey with the Moabite emissaries (vv. 6, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 35, 37), sharpens the link between Balaam's sin of going with them and his punishment the crushing of his leg against the wall.25

In our last three cases the punishment is heaven-sent (though with Balaam we have the unusual instance of an animal serving as the instrument of punishment). But there are also cases where the pun ishment is meted out by human beings. Consider David's punishment of Rechab and Baanah after they boastfully report their assassination of his rival, Ish-Bosheth. Rather than receive the expected reward, they are punished measure for measure: David orders the execution of the men who had slain Ish-Bosheth in his bed. But he goes fur ther: "David commanded his young men, and they killed them, and cut off their hands and feet" (2 Sam. iv 12). The amputation of their limbs seems to be viewed as repaying them measure for measure. They cut off Ish-Bosheth's head and were punished by having their limbs cut off.26 In addition, this too seems to be a case of the principle that punishment is meted out to the offending limb: the legs that carried Rechab and Baanah to Ish-Bosheth's house (v. 5, n") and the hands with which they struck him down and cut off his head (v. 7, nIMV lvNt-nM f1 n are punished by amputation.27

25 Compare Rashbam's commentary on Gen. xxxii 29: "Similarly one finds that whenever someone attempts a journey or refuses a journey against God's will, he is punished. . . . Similarly, concerning Balaam (Num. xxii 22), 'God became angry that he was going,' and as a result he became lame, as it is written (Num. xxii 25), 'She squeezed Balaam's foot against the wall' and (Num. xxiii 3) 'He went about shefi,' which

means lame, as in the phrase (Job xxxiii 21), 'My bones were dislocated (shuppu)" (Rabbi Samuel Ben Meir's Commentary on Genesis: An Annotated Translation, ed. M. I. Lockshin [New York, 1989], pp. 210-211).

26 So too J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art and Poetry in the Books of Samuel, vol. 3: Throne and City (Assen, 1990), p. 135.

27 Ibid.; R. Alter, The David Story?A Translation with Commentary of 1 and 2 Samuel (New York and London, 1999), p. 219; Shemesh, "Measure for Measure in the David Stories," p. 95.



350 YAEL SHEMESH

1.4 Privy parts

After Dinah's rape by Shechem, her brothers adopt a stratagem to facilitate avenging her honor. They demand that all the men of the town undergo circumcision as a precondition for a pact between the two sides. This makes it possible for Simeon and Levi to kill all of them on the third day, "when they were sore" (Gen. xxxiv 13-26). Circumcision applies to the organ with which Shechem had sinned28 and constitutes a sort of inverted rape performed by the brothers on the residents of the city whose prince had raped their sister.29 We may have a case of punishment of a woman's sexual organs in

the story of Phinehas' zealotry, when he pierces Cozbi the daughter

of Zur through her body (Mlq-1) (Num. xxv 8). Assuming that the trans gression of Zimri son of Salu and Cozbi was sexual (see Num. xxxi

15-18), and that MM'117: means "her belly" (see Deut. xviii 3) the NJPS and NRSV rendering or even "her groin" (Jerusalem Bible)30 Phinehas aims his blow at the inner organ that was implicated by Cozbi's adultery. The talmudic sages carry this even further and apply it to Zimri as well: "He [Phinehas] succeeded [in driving his spear] exactly through the sexual organs of the man and the woman" (The Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 82,2 [ed. I. Epstein]).

2. Legal texts

2.1 Hand Unlike the codes of the ancient Near East, biblical law almost never

prescribes corporal punishment in the form of amputation of limbs. The only case that mandates such punishment, leaving aside the tal ionic "eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (Ex. xxi 23-25; Lev. xxiv 19-20; Deut. xix 21), is found in Deuteronomy xxv 11-12: "When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her

28 M. Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative (Bloomington, 1985), pp. 466-467. 29 See A. A. Keefe, "Rapes of Women/Wars of Men," Semeia 62 (1993), p. 84. 30 Another common translation of FirOp. is "her shrine." Based on etymology, qeuah

and qovah have to refer to a hollow or penetrable organ?which pretty much limits them to stomach, uterus, or vagina. Note the rendering of the ancient versions: LXX, in metras (? womb); Vulgate, in locis genitalibus. Clearly the choice of the word was dic tated by the use of qubbah in the first half of the verse.




hand and seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall have no pity." The Babylonian Talmud asserts that this really means a monetary penalty: the woman is to redeem her hand by the payment of a fine.3' Yet the admonitory "your eye shall have no pity" makes sense only if we are dealing with a harsh and unusual sanction the amputation of a limb.32

Some explain this harsh penalty on the grounds that the woman caused irreversible damage to the assailant's testicles (similar to Middle Assyrian Laws, Tablet A, section 8), rendering him sterile.33 But unlike the Assyrian law, Deuteronomy makes no mention of injury; the use of the root hzq for the woman's action does not carry any connota tion of damage. It is more plausible that the severity of this biblical edict stems chiefly from considerations of modesty. Similarly, the Middle Assyrian Laws mandate that a man who touches (the pudenda of?) a married woman be punished by the amputation of a finger.34 There is no mention here of any danger to the woman's fertility; it is sim ply a matter of modesty. For a woman to touch a man's privy parts, and vice versa, are infractions of sexual morality,35 to be punished in keeping with the principle that the offending limb suffers; the trans gressing hand or finger is amputated.

In the parallel to the biblical law in the same Assyrian text, the penalty for a woman who grabs a man's testicle during the course of a fight and injures him is loss of a finger. Should she also damage the other testicle, whether directly (during the fight) or indirectly (the infec

tion spreads from the damaged testicle to the other one), her limbs are amputated.36 A similar law seems to have prevailed in Nuzi. In a

31 BT Baba Qama 28a. 32 The admonitory language here is also found in Deut. xiii 9 (concerning idola

ters), xix 13 (concerning murderers), and xix 21 (concerning perjured witnesses). In all three cases the malefactors face the death penalty.

33 See E. Roth, "Does the Thorah Punish Impudence??Notes to Deuteronomy 25: 11-12," in Etudes Orientales ? la M?moire de Paul Hirschler, ed. E. Komlos (Budapest, 1950), pp. 116-121; A. Phillips, Ancient Israel's Criminal Law (New York, 1970), p. 94; L. Eslinger, "The case of the immodest lady wresder in Deuteronomy xxv 11-12," VT 31 (1981), pp. 272, 277.

34 See M. A. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, 2nd ed. (Adanta, Georgia, 1997), p. 157. Her proposed translation is: "If a man lays a hand upon a woman, attacking her like a rutting bull (?)." The law goes on to prescribe amputa tion of the upper lip if a man kissed her.

35 C. M. Carmichael, The Laws of Deuteronomy (Ithaca and London, 1974), p. 234. 36 The defective text leaves us unable to determine with certainty what limb is

intended.



352 YAEL SHEMESH

memorandum from a court there, dating from roughly the fifteenth century BCE, we read the complaint of a man that, during the course of a fight with another man, a woman (perhaps his opponent's wife) damaged his ahu. Here ahu, which means side or thigh, is evidently a euphemism for the male genitalia. The court requested and received the lord's permission to amputate one of the woman's fingers, in addi tion to fining her.37

2.2 Privy parts

Our principle can be find in the law of the sotah (Numbers v 11-31). The fate of a married woman who has been defiled by contact with another man is that her thigh falls and her belly swells (vv. 21, 22, 27). The talmudic sages noted that these are the organs that were involved in her sin: "She pushed her thigh at him, therefore her thigh falls. She took him on her belly, therefore her belly swells."38 But here too we should perhaps understand "thigh" as a euphemism for the reproductive organs,39 as in the idiom "the issue of his thigh"40 and in the patriarchal formula in which the oath-taker places his hand under the "thigh" of the person to whom he makes the pledge.4'

Whatever the precise significance of the falling thigh and swelling belly,42 the injury seems to involve a loss of fertility (cf. v. 28). That is, a woman who engaged in illicit sexual relations is punished, mea sure for measure, by damage to her reproductive organs. It is impor tant to stress, however, that unlike the previous case of the woman

37 See C. H. Gordon, "A New Akkadian Parallel to Deuteronomy 25, 11-12," JPOS 15 (1935), pp. 29-34.

38 Tosefta Sotah 3:4 (ed. J. Neusner); see also M Sotah 1:7; BT Sotah 9a; etc. These sources add to the biblical account that the officiating priest laid bare the bosom of the suspected woman as part of her abasement (M Sotah 1:5 ff. et passim).

39 The view of S. D. Luzzatto in his commentary on Number v 21; so too T. Frymer-Kensky, "The strange case of the suspected sotah," FT 34 (1984), pp. 18-20; A. Bach, "Good to the Last Drop: Viewing the Sotah (Numbers 5.11-31) as the Glass Half Empty and Wondering How to View it Half Full," in Women in the Hebrew Bible, ed. A. Bach (New York and London, 1999), pp. 510-512. Bach reads "thigh" and "belly" as euphemisms for the uterus, indicating a measure-for-measure concept: the woman committed a sexual transgression and is punished in her sexual organs (p. 512).

40 Gen. xlvi 26; Ex. i 5; Judg. viii 30. 41 Gen. xxiv 2, 9; xlvii 29. See Rashi's commentary on Gen. xxiv 2. 42 Josephus Flavius believes the reference is to dropsy (Jewish Antiquities III 11,6;

trans. H. St. J. Thackeray [London, 1930], vol. 4, p. 449). Frymer-Kensky ("The Strange Case," pp. 18, 20) believes it refers to the uterus dropping. See there, p. 19 n. 15, for a survey of other opinions.




who grasps a man's genitalia, the punishment of the sotah, to whose transgression there are no witnesses, is not in the province of human judges and must come from the Lord.

This principle may also be found in the Holiness Code (Lev. xvii-xxvi): "If a man lies with his uncle's wife, he has uncovered his uncle's naked ness; they shall bear their sin, they shall die childless" (Lev. xx 20). As Milgrom notes, "it is hardly coincidental that, just as reflected in this chapter, the withholding of progeny serves as a divine punishment for sexual violations."43 He goes so far as to compare this to the account of the sealing of the wombs of Abimelech's wives and concubines because of his near (and unwitting) adultery with Sarah as well as to the infertility that is the lot of the sotah.44 So just as with the punish

ment of the sotah, here too we may be dealing with a divine punish ment of the reproductive organs: the transgressors are stricken with barrenness as punishment for their sexual transgression.

3. Prophetic books

3.1 The head

In Isaiah's prophecy about the haughty daughters of Zion, who preen and primp and walk "with outstretched necks, glancing wan tonly with their eyes" (Isa. iii 16), their punishment is that "the Lord will smite with a scab [or 'bare' (New JPS) Heb. rtD] the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will lay bare their secret parts" (ibid. 17). This is followed by a veritable catalogue of the garments and jewelry worn by these women, including the headbands (v. 18) and turbans (v. 23) used as head coverings, as well as the Mt V evidently an elaborate hair-do held in place by a comb of worked cop per. The Lord will eradicate all these symbols of pride from Jerusalem (v. 18), along with the women's beauty (vv. 17 and 24). And the

women, who had been accustomed to walk with outstretched necks, which means, according to the Septuagint, "with head high" or, accord ing to another interpretation, "with heads stretched sideways," while shooting coy glances to check whether they are making an impression on the bystanders,45 will be afflicted on their scalp. The meaning of

43 J. Milgrom, Leviticus 17-22 (AB; Doubleday, 2000), p. 1757. 44 Ibid, pp. 1757-1758. 45 J. D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1-33 (WBC; Waco, Texas 1985), p. 44.



354 YAEL SHEMESH

the verb fltL in verse 17 is doubtful. A common interpretation derives it from MMP0 "scab." But Driver, relying on the Akkadian and Arabic, takes it to mean procephalic baldness.46 This may also be the mean

ing of the rest of the verse, that "the Lord will lay bare JMMP." The conventional rendering is that the women's privy parts will be exposed (see below, ?3.6). Driver, however, reads it in light of the Akkadian muttutam gullubu, "to shave the hair of the forehead" a humiliating punishment in ancient Babylonia.47 Whether the meaning is a disease of the scalp or the intentional shaving of female prisoners' heads by their captors, meant to humiliate them or symbolize their change of ownership, the women who formerly held their heads high in over weening pride will be stricken on their heads.

3.2 The eyes

The Lord's word to Ezekiel about the exile that will befall the peo ple of Judah, the "rebellious house," whose "who have eyes to see, but see not" (Ezek. xii 2), includes the following description: "And the prince who is among them shall lift his baggage upon his shoulder in the dark, and shall go forth; he shall dig through the wall and go out through it; he shall cover his face, that he may not see the land with his eyes. And I will spread my net over him, and he shall be taken in my snare; and I will bring him to Babylon in the land of the Chaldeans, yet he shall not see it; and he shall die there" (ibid., 12-13). The Lord's message is accompanied by a symbolic pantomime that Ezekiel is told to act out-which includes covering his face, so that he cannot see the land (v. 6). Some commentators maintain that all the references in the chapter to not seeing are a later addition and allude to Zedekiah's blinding by the Babylonians.48

Others hold that the lack of sight described in verses 6 and 12 has nothing to do with the blinding of Zedekiah (which took place in Riblah, not Jerusalem [2 Kings xxv 6-7; Jer. xxxix 5-7, lii 9-11]) but stems from the fact that the prince covers his face, whether in dis grace or to conceal his identity. Hence there is no reason to view these

46 G. R Driver, "Hebrew Notes," VT 1 (1951), p. 242. 47 G. R. Driver, "Linguistic and Textual Problems: Isa I-XXXIX," JTS 38 (1937),

p. 38. 48 See, for example, R. M. Hals, Ezekiel (FOTL; Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1989),

p. 77'. He suggests that the prophet himself updated his prophecy in light of Zedekiah's tragic fate in 587 B.C.




verses as a secondary addition made after 587 B.C. According to this line, only the statement "he shall not see it" (v. 13) is an editorial insertion (perhaps added by the prophet himself, who wanted to update his prophecy post factum) that refers to Zedekiah's blinding.49 Whatever

the case, the motif of not seeing that runs through the entire prophecy seems to be a punishment for the nation's theological blindness (v. 2). The link culminates in the editorial addition in verse 13 "he shall not see it" which clearly refers to the blinding of Zedekiah. Zedekiah the prince of the people pays for the people's theological and metaphor ical blindness with the loss of his own physical sight.

3.3 TIhe lips

The word of the Lord to Isaiah about Sennacherib includes the fol lowing: "Because you have raged against me and your arrogance has come to my ears, I will put my hook in your nose and my bit in your

lips (ITCt), and I will turn you back on the way by which you came" (Isa. xxxvii 29, 2 Kings xix 28). The Lord will treat the Assyrian king

with the same cruelty the monarch has shown his enemies: dragging them like beasts that must be bridled and led by the nose (as one does to a bull) or by the upper lip (a horse) in order to humiliate them in public. On the Zinjirly stele, the Assyrian king Esarhaddon is depicted leading two captives evidently Baal of Tyre and Tirhakah of Egypt, by a rope tied to a ring that goes through their lips.50 Ashurbanipal, too, recounts his treatment of Uate':

Upon an oracle command of Asshur and Ninlil I pierced his cheeks with the sharp-edged spear, my personal weapon.... I put the ring to his jaw, placed a dog collar around his neck and made him guard the bar of the east gate of Nineveh....5

But the bridle placed in the king's mouth has an additional significance in Isaiah's prophecy, for this punishment will strike him on account of a transgression he committed with his lips: "Because you have raged against me and your arrogance has come to my ears"-that is, because

49 See, for example, L. C. Allen, Ezekiel 1-19 (WBC; Dallas, Texas, 1994), pp. 176, 180, 182.

50 J. B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East in Pictures, 2nd ed. (Princeton, New Jersey, 1969), p. 154, fig. 447.

51 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3rd ed, ed. J. B. Pritchard (Princeton, 1969), p. 300.



356 YAEL SHEMESH

of the angry and arrogant words Sennacherib sounded in the ears of the Lord. Indeed, the prophecy emphasizes that Sennacherib's sin is connected to his speech: "Whom have you mocked and reviled? Against whom have you raised your voice?" (Isa. xxxvii 23, 2 Kings xix 22); "by your servants you have mocked the Lord, and you have said . . (Isa. xxxvii 24, 2 Kings xix 23).

3.4 The heart

The idea that the heart that sins is punished is found in Ezekiel:

Son of man, these men have taken their idols into their hearts, and set the stumbling block of their iniquity before their faces; should I let myself be inquired of at all by them? Therefore speak to them, and say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Any man of the house of Israel who takes his idols into his heart and sets the stumbling block of his iniquity before his face, and yet comes to the prophet, I the Lord will answer him myself because of the multitude of his idols, that I may lay hold of the hearts of the

house of Israel, who are all estranged from me through their idols. (Ezek. xiv 3-5)

In other words, the Lord will indeed answer the fence-sitters of Israel, who come to inquire of the Lord even though they worship idols as well. His reply, however, will not be what they are expecting. Rather, it is intended to "lay hold of the hearts of the house of Israel" (v. 5) that is, "to strike terror into the hearts of all idolaters among the Israelites."52 This is on account of their transgression that they "have taken their idols into their hearts" (v. 3 and again in v. 4).

3.5 The breasts

In Ezekiel xxiii 34, the prophet declares that Oholibah, who rep resents Jerusalem and is compared to a woman who has played the harlot, will tear her breasts. Breast-beating was a common expression of mourning in the ancient Near East (see Isa. xxxii 12, Nahum ii 8 [7]); here, though, it becomes self-injury, the result of unbearable mis ery. This self-misery is also associated with the previous image of Oholibah, who drank herself to drunkenness and sorrow (vv. 32-34). Hence her actions are irrational, suited to a drunken madness. It is

52 J. W. Wevers, Ezekiel (NCB; [London], 1969), p. 112. Similarly, G. A. Cooke, The Book of Ezekiel (ICC; Edinburgh, 1936), p. 151.




also possible that she tears her breasts in a fit of self-loathing.53 Whether

this clause, which is not found in the LXX, is a secondary addition54 or an integral part of the prophecy,55 its link to the sin is clear: the breasts that were fondled by the lovers (vv. 3 and 21) and were a source of erotic attraction will be torn by the adulteress herself. As Driver puts it, "she will tear out her own breasts as the peccant mem bers through which she has sinned."56

3.6 Privy parts

The most common image in the prophetic books, with regard to punishment of the offending limb, is that of Israel or Judah as an adulteress whose nakedness is exposed to her lovers by the Lord, viewed as the betrayed husband. This image, used by several prophets, is espe cially developed by Ezekiel. For example, he writes about the trans gression and punishment of Jerusalem:

Thus says the Lord GOD, Becauseyour shame was laid bare andyour naked ness uncovered in your harlotries with your lovers, and because of all your idols, and because of the blood of your children that you gave to them, therefore, behold, I will gather all your lovers, with whom you took plea sure, all those you loved and all those you loathed; I will gather them against you from every side, and will uncoveryour nakedness to them, that

they may see allyour nakedness." (Ezek. xvi 36-37)

In other words, Jerusalem, which has voluntarily displayed her naked ness to the nations and sported wantonly with them, will be punished by the Lord's stripping her bare against her will, exposing her naked ness (i.e., her disgrace) to the nations that gather to make war on her. Just as a man's spreading his cloak over woman symbolizes his assump tion of responsibility for her, in marriage, so ripping off her garments represents the severing of that obligation (Hosea ii 4-5 [2-3]).17 That is, by stripping Jerusalem bare in front of all the Lord is publicly

53 M. Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37 (AB; Doubleday, 1997), p. 484. 54 Wevers, Ezekiel, p. 185. 55 Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, p. 484. 56 G. R. Driver, "Ezekiel: Linguistic and Textual Problems," Biblica 35 (1954),

p. 155; quoted in agreement by Greenberg, Ezekiel 21-37, p. 48. 57 For this symbolic meaning of garments in the ancient world, and extra-biblical

parallels, see P. A. Kruger, "The Hem of the Garment in Marriage. The Meaning of the Symbolic Gesture in Ruth 3:9 and Ezek 16:8," Journal of Northwest Semitic Language 12 (1984), pp. 79-86; D. I. Block, The Book of EZekiel~Chapters 1-24 (NICOT; Grand

Rapids, Michigan and Cambridge, 1997), pp. 501-502.



358 YAEL SHEMESH

proclaiming his divorce from her. In addition, she is punished as befits an adulteress (Ezek. xvi 38 and xxiii 45), whose naked body is exposed in public.58 The principle behind the judgment of the adulteress, like that behind the prophetic metaphor that employs it, is that the offending

organ suffers the punishment: the woman (who generally represents Israel or Judah) voluntarily exposed her private parts to her lovers; now she is punished by having them displayed to all, in demeaning circumstances. The same image appears in Ezekiel xxiii: the sin of Oholibah (Jerusalem) is that she "flaunted her nakedness" (v. 18). Her punishment includes being stripped off her garments (v. 26) and left exposed by her enemies: "they shall ... leave you naked and bare, and the nakedness of your harlotry shall be uncovered" (v. 29). The prophet

Nahum employs the image of the harlot who is punished by being displayed in her nakedness in his prophecy about the capital of Assyria. Nineveh, which he compares to a harlot (Nahum iii 4), will be pun ished in that the Lord will publicly expose her naked body, including her private parts: "I will lift up your skirts (T'1) over your face; and

I will let nations look on your nakedness (r?rr;)" (Nahum iii 5). Even

if we do not accept Eslinger's conjecture that here 7lVj means "your genitalia,"59 that is almost certainly the sense of 77Th3.60

The metaphor of stripping a woman naked as punishment for adul tery is also found in Jeremiah xiii 22 and 26 (concerning Judah) and in Hosea ii 4-5 [2-3] and 12 [10] (concerning the people of Israel). The punishment of disrobing may also be mentioned in Isaiah iii 17; here, though, it is not metaphoric but a real punishment for the proud and primping daughters of Zion (we discussed this prophecy above, ?3.1). Many interpret the word BPJ, which the Lord will lay bare, as referring to their "secret parts" like the modern Hebrew ME; "vulva.")61

58 Kruger, "The Hem," p. 82. 59 L. Eslinger, "The infinite in a finite organical perception (Isaiah vi 1-5)," FT 45

(1995), pp. 145-173, esp. 154-155 on Nahum iii 5. Unlike the standard translations, which render Nahum iii 5 as "I will lift up your skirts over your face," Eslinger (p. 155) renders it: "I will expose your genitalia to your face." This reading was accepted by K. Spronk [Nahum [HCOT; Kampen, The Netherlands, 1997], p. 123), who has, "and I shall uncover your private parts up until your face."

60 See, for example, the commentaries ad loc. of Rashi, Abraham Ibn Ezra, and D. Kimhi.

61 Thus, for example, in D. Kimhi's commentary: ". . . referring to the pudenda; in other words, they will walk naked before the enemy leading them into captivity." See also the standard English versions and the suggestion by Miller (Sin and Judgment in the Prophets, p. 41), who notes the measure-for-measure aspect here.




In fact, the word nM appears in only one other place in the Bible: "the sockets for the doors" (1 Kings vii 50) a meaning compatible with understanding the term in Isaiah as a reference to the genitalia.

4. Poetgy (Psalms)

4.1 The mouth

The most common image in Psalms relevant to our topic has to do with the organs of speech-the lips, tongue, and teeth.

4.1.1 The lips In Psalms xxxi 19 (18), the psalmist addresses the Lord: "Let the

lying lips be dumb, which speak insolently against the righteous in pride and contempt." His request that the wicked be rendered dumb evidently envisions their death and descent to the silence of Sheol (compare v. 18 [17]: "let the wicked be put to shame, let them go dumbfounded to Sheol").62

4.1.2 The tongue Speaking of his enemies, the poet entreats, "destroy their plans, 0

Lord, confuse their tongues; for I see violence and strife in the city" (Ps. lv 10 [9]). The curse is directed against his enemies, who, although their speech is "smoother than butter" and whose words are "softer than oil," have only violence in their heart (v. 22 [21]). It is clear that they are using their voice against the psalmist himself, for they taunt him (v. 13 [12]).

In contrast to the imprecation called down on enemies we also find a conditional curse directed against the poet himself and his tongue. The speaker, an exile from Judah, sitting by the waters of Babylon, vows, "if I forget you, 0 Jerusalem, let my right hand wither! Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I do not remember you" (Ps. cxxxvii 5-6) where remember must also be understood in the sense of mentioning out loud: if I do not speak the name ofJerusalem,63 may

62 P. C. Craigie, Psalms 1-50 (WBC; Waco, Texas 1983), p. 262. 63 For this meaning of zkr, see Jer. xx 9, xxiii 36. And see Abraham Ibn Ezra ad

loc: "Remember you?in speech." So too S. Bar-Efrat, "Love of Zion: A Literary Interpretation of Psalm 137," in Tehillah le-Moshe: Biblical and Judaic Studies in Honor of

Moshe Greenberg, ed. M. Cogan et al. (Winona Lake, Indiana, 1997), p. 8.



360 YAEL SHEMESH

my tongue be stilled and silent (v. 6).64 It seems plausible that here the speaker is one of the Levite choristers of the Temple,65 and the implication is that if his curse is realized he will be unable to prac tice his profession and sing the hymns the Levites were wont to chant

in the Holy Temple (see further below, ?4.2.2). The link between the crime and the punishment, with regard to the sinning tongue, is twofold:

the tongue that failed to mention Jerusalem will be paralyzed; but in addition, the tongue that swore an oath not to forget Jerusalem will lose the capacity to say anything at all, should it break that vow.66

4.1.3 7he lips and tongue In psalms xii 4 [3], the poet calls on the Lord: "May the Lord cut

off all flattering lips, the tongue that makes great boasts." The sin of the wicked is embodied in the speech that issues from between their lips and the tongue that shapes the words, as can be understood from the previous and following verses: "Every one utters lies to his neigh bor; with flattering lips and a double heart they speak" (v. 3 [2]); "those who say, 'With our tongue we will prevail, our lips are with us; who is our master?"' (v. 5 [4]).

4.1.4 The teeth The psalmist turns to the Lord: "For thou dost smite all my ene

mies on the cheek, Thou dost break the teeth of the wicked" (Ps. iii 8 [7]). Earlier he mentioned his enemies' sin toward him in mocking terms: "Many are saying of me, there is no help for him in God. [Selah]" (v. 3 [2]). Concerning this request that the teeth of the wicked be broken, Anderson writes: "Here the metaphor is changed and the foes are likened to wild beasts; to break their teeth means to deprive them of their power to do harm."67 It seems likely, though that aside

64 For this meaning of "let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth," compare Ezek. iii 26.

65 Abraham Ibn Ezra and D. Kimhi on v. 1; Bar-Efrat, "Love of Zion," p. 7; Y. Zakovitch, "'By the Waters of Babylon': Psalm 137: Memory in the Shadow of Trauma" (Hebrew), in Homage to Shmuel: Studies in the World of the Bible, ed. Z. Talshir, S. Yonah, and D. Sivan (Jerusalem, 2001), p. 202.

66 Bar-Efrat picked this up in "Love of Zion," pp. 7-8. It is possible that Ps. lxiii 12 [11]?"for the mouths of liars will be stopped"?is a curse that the wicked lose their power of speech. Perhaps there too the idea is that they were forsworn.

67 A. A. Anderson, The Book of Psalms, vol. 1 (NCB; Grand Rapids, 1972), p. 75.




from the idea of averting harm (mouths with broken teeth cannot injure others with their speech), this (like Anderson's two other exam ples-Job xxix 17 and Ps. lviii 7 [6]) also contains the idea of pun ishing the offending organ that caused the damage. As Kraus writes: "The mouth, from which issued the mocking statements of the ene mies, has been smashed (v. 3)."68 In a similar vein, the psalmist calls on the Lord: "O God, break the teeth in their mouths; tear out the fangs of the young lions, 0 Lord!" (Ps. lviii 7 [6]). In this case, too, it is clear that the sin involves speech: the wicked, who pretend to be honest judges, are actually "speaking lies" (v. 4 [3]). In the next verse they are compared to venomous snakes. Even though it is not stated explicitly, the image in this psalm is of a snake that stores its venom in its fangs. Consequently, smashing its teeth is also a defensive mea sure aimed at making it impossible for the wicked to "bite" their vic tims-that is, to harm them by the words that issue from their mouths

as well as a punishment of the offending organ.

4.2 The arm and the raght hand

4.2.1 The arm The psalmist beseeches of the Lord, "Break thou the arm of the

wicked and evildoer" (Ps. x 15). It is plausible that this is not to be understood literally, since in the Bible the arm is a symbol of might. Here, too, the poet is asking that the wicked be deprived of their power to do harm.69 At the same time, the metaphor seems to include the idea that the offending limb is punished, since the evildoers' crim inal actions are performed with the arm: "in hiding places he mur ders the innocent.... He lurks that he may seize the poor, he seizes the poor when he draws him into his net" (vv. 8-9). Similarly, in Psalm xxxvii the poet expresses his trust that "the arms of the wicked shall be broken" (v. 17). Here too the evildoers' sin, which involves bending the bow, is performed with the arm: "The wicked draw the sword and bend their bows, to bring down the poor and needy, to slay those who walk uprightly" (v. 14). In his commentary on v. 17,

68 H. J. Kraus, Psalms T59: A Commentary, trans. H. C. Oswald (Minneapolis, 1988), p. 141.

69 Anderson, The Book of Psalms, vol. 1, p. 118. For zeroa' in the sense of strength or might see, inter alia, Ps. lxxvii 16 (15), lxxxix 14 (13); Job xl 9. See above, ?1.3.



362 YAEL SHEMESH

Abraham Ibn Ezra explains that the arms are mentioned because they are used to bend the bow; just as the bows will be broken (v. 15), so will their arms.

4.2.2 The right hand To conclude this section let us return to Psalm cxxxvii, where the

poet invokes a curse on his own right hand. Above we referred to the curse he calls down on his tongue should he fail to keep the oath that issued from his mouth (v. 6). Now let us examine the first part of the

imprecation, directed against his right hand: "If I forget you (r7= ), O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither! ('Z'i; ?" (v. 5). The use of the verb n:jt with reference to both the sin and the punishment signals that this is a case of measure for measure, even if the mean ing of '11'1 MnVtT is unclear. Various glosses have been offered for this collocation, including following:70 The object is missing and must be supplied e.g., let my right hand forget its skill and not be able to function.7' A slight change of the vocalization (flWrl) yields the pas sive "be forgotten" the rendering of the LXX (?irtXO(aYOiii) and the Vulgate ("oblivioni detur dextera mea"); that is, the hand will be par alyzed and its owner will forget it because he cannot feel it. The verb skh should be understood, in light of the Ugaritic tkh, as "wither"72 (elsewhere rendered by the verb yb?s [1 Kings xiii 4; Zech xi 17]; thus RSV). The text should be emended to Wrl ("grow lean"). The verb should be understood in the light of the Arabic ksh as "lame, crippled, paralyzed."73

70 For a list and discussion of the various suggestions, see G. A. Rendsburg and S. L. Rendsburg, "Physiological and Philological Notes to Psalm 137," JQR 83 (1992-93), pp. 385-399.

71 See, for example, the commentaries ad loc. of Abraham Ibn Ezra, D. Kimhi, and D. Altschuler (Metzudat David).

72 Interestingly enough, this view can be traced back as far as Abraham Ibn Ezra: "some say it is a hapax, 'dry up'." The first to associate tiskah with the Ugaritic root was W. F. Albright, "Anath and the Dragon," BASOR 84 (1941), p. 15, n. 3.

73 This goes back to I. Eitan, "An Identification of tiskah y?m?n?, Ps 137:5," JBL 47 (1928), pp. 193-195. His suggestion is that the original text was "TET t?rpn, but when the meaning of this rare and archaic word was lost, some copyist switched the order of the letters, under the influence of ^rOTK. The crux of this idea was accepted by G. A. Rendsburg and S. L. Rendsburg ("Physiological and Philological Notes to Psalm 137"), except that they maintain (p. 392) that there is no need to amend the Masoretic text. Because the metathesis of letters is a common linguistic phenomenon, it seems more plausible that the Hebrew and Arabic roots are a metathetic pair. They go beyond their predecessors by considering the medical aspect of the curse. In the




Whatever the case, it seems clear to me that what is meant is a loss of hand's ability to move, corresponding to the parallel clause that refers to loss of the power of speech (see above, ?4.1.2). For what sin is the hand to be punished? The right hand is the one raised when a person takes an oath,74 hence the hand that was raised in the vain oath is to lose its power of movement, like the mouth, mentioned in the next verse, which uttered the vain oath and will be punished with muteness.75 In other words, the poet, one of the Levite choristers of the Temple (see above, ?4.1.2) will not be fit to do his job, should he be foresworn, because his right hand will not be able to pluck the strings of his lyre and his tongue will not be able to sing.76

5. The wisdom literature

5.1 The eye

According to Proverbs, those who are disrespectful of their parents will be punished measure for measure: "The eye that mocks a father and scorns to obey a mother will be picked out by the ravens of the valley and eaten by the vultures" (Prov. xxx 17). The intention may be that he winks (see Prov. x 10), or simply that he looks at his par ents with a sneer on his face. In any case, the punishment of a per son who is disrespectful to his parents with his eyes is to die in the open field and lie there unburied, so that the offending eye can be punished-pecked out by scavenging birds.77 We might say that this warning, with slight modification, fits the case of Samson. The Danite hero certainly demonstrated a lack of respect for his parents when he ignored their rebuke that he wanted to marry a foreign woman and stubbornly insisted on the Philistine woman who was "right in his

first section of their article they suggest that the poet is describing a cerebro-vascular accident, or stroke, localized in the left side of the brain. They note that such a pathol ogy results typically in paralysis of the right side of the body and speech defects like aphasia or apraxia.

74 On raising the hand when taking an oath, see Gen. xiv 22; Ex. vi 8; Neh. ix 15. As evidence that it is the right hand that is used when taking an oath, see Isa. lxii 8, and also Ps. cxliv 8, where we find a combination of the hand and mouth, undoubt edly in the context of an oath.

75 Bar-Efrat, "Love of Zion," p. 7; Zakovitch, "By the Waters of Babylon," p. 191. 76 See Abraham Ibn Ezra and David Kimhi on w. 5, 6; Bar-Efrat, "Love of Zion,"

pp. 7-8; Zakovitch, "By the Waters of Babylon," p. 192. 77 W. McKane, Proverbs: A New Approach (OTL; London, 1970), pp. 656-657.



364 YAEL SHEMESH

eyes" i.e., who pleased him (Judg. xiv 1-3). In the end his eyes were put out- though not by vultures and not after his death, but by his Philistine enemies during his life (see above, ?1.1).

5.2 The tongue

A short adage in Proverbs, concerning the difference between the righteous person, who speaks words of wisdom, and the liar, is rele vant to our topic: "The mouth of the righteous brings forth wisdom, but the perverse tongue will be cut off" (Prov. x 31).

5.3 The teeth

Job insists to his comforters that he is righteous. He presents him self as a warrior in the just battle of the weaker elements of society and as someone who, when he found himself involved in a quarrel, would inquire who was right and act accordingly: "I broke the fangs of the unrighteous, and made him drop his prey from his teeth" (Job xxix 17). Here the miscreant is compared to a predatory beast that grasps its prey in his teeth; the first object of breaking the teeth is to free the victim. But it is also a punishment of the offending organ.

5.4 The arm

Endeavoring to prove his righteousness, Job invokes a conditional curse against himself:78 "If I have raised my hand against the father less, because I saw help in the gate; then let my shoulder blade fall from my shoulder, and let my arm be broken from its socket" (Job xxxi 21-22). For lifting his hand to strike or threaten the helpless,79 he would be punished by having his shoulder dislocated and his arm broken -leaving his hand helpless to do harm.

III. Conclusion

The principle that the offending limb is punished is applied in the Bible from head to foot, and in all genres: narrative, law, prophecy, poetry, and the wisdom literature. In most cases the intention is lit

78 Compare Ps. cxxxvii 5-6, ?? 4.1.2 and 4.2.2 above. The difference is that Job directs the curse against the past (if he has ever acted inappropriately, may he be pun ished for it), whereas the psalmist targets future lapses.

79 Compare Isa. xi 15; xix 16; Zech, ii 13 (9); Job i 12.




eral, but sometimes it is merely figurative. The punishment is directed both against specific characters Israelites like Samson and Jeroboam, gentiles like Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar-and against groups (the inhabitants of Shechem, the daughters of Zion, and the house of Israel). Usually the punishment is heaven-sent, but there are many cases in which it is inflicted by human beings-individuals (like Phinehas and David) or a group (Jacob's sons, the Babylonians). In one case, the sinner is described as punishing her own offending organs (Ezek. xxiii 34). In two other cases we find the principle in the form of a self directed conditional curse (Ps. cxxxvii 5-6,Job xxxi 21-22). In Psalms it appears almost always as a request: the poet entreats the Lord to punish the wicked. In two cases animals are invoked as the instrument of punishment (Balaam's ass [Num. xxii 25] and the birds that will peck out the eyes of those who mock their parents [Prov. xxx 17]). Sometimes the agent of punishment is aware that it is fulfilling the principle of measure for measure (certainly when the punishment comes from the Lord, but also in the legal texts and in narrative, where David seems to be well aware of the poetic justice of amputating Rechab's and Baanah's limbs); at other times the human being is an unwitting agent of divine justice (such as the Philistines when they blind Samson).

In all these cases, the principle of punishing the offending organ plays a theological role, since it constitutes proof that the world is directed by a "righteous judge" (Ps. ix 5 [4]), who gives to every man "according to his ways and according to the fruit of his doings" (Jer. xvii 10 and xxxii 19), of whom one can aptly say, "Righteous art thou, O Lord, and right are thy judgments" (Ps. cxix 137).

Abstract

One aspect of the principle of "measure for measure" is considered-the idea that the offending organ is punished. This concept can be found in all the biblical genres: narrative, law, the prophetic literature, poetry, and the wisdom literature. The organs that are punished run almost the full length of the body, from head to toe. Sometimes the concept is invoked literally, sometimes only metaphorically. In most cases the pun ishment is heaven-sent; but there are no few incidents where human action is involved and even animals (twice). In every case, the principle serves a theological function, in that it corroborates the existence of reward and punishment in the world.



Documents

PUNISHMENT OF THE OFFENDING ORGAN IN BIBLICAL LITERATURE