Biblical Ambiguities: Metaphor, Semantics, and Divine Imagery (Brill Reference Library of Judaism)

232 Pages·2001·1.9 MB·English

by  David H. Aaron

BIBLICAL
AMBIGUITIES:
Metaphor, Semantics
and Divine Imagery
David H. Aaron
BRILL
BIBLICAL AMBIGUITIES
THE BRILL REFERENCE LIBRARY
OF
ANCIENT JUDAISM
Editors
J. NEUSNER (Bard College) — H. BASSER (Queens University)
A.J. AVERY-PECK (College of the Holy Cross) — Wm.S. GREEN (University of
Rochester) — G. STEMBERGER (University of Vienna) — I. GRUENWALD
(Tel Aviv University) — MAYER GRUBER (Ben-Gurion University of the Negev)
GARY G. PORTON (University of Illinois) — JOSÉ FAUR (Bar Ilan University)
VOLUME 4
BIBLICAL AMBIGUITIES
Metaphor, Semantics and Divine Imagery
BY
DAVID H. AARON
BRILL
LEIDEN •BOSTON •KÖLN
2001
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Aaron, David, 1957-.
Biblical ambiguities : methaphor, semantics, and divine imagery / by
David H. Aaron.
p. cm. — (The Brill reference library of ancient Judaism, ISSN
1566-1237 ; vol. 4)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN 9004120327 (hardcover : alk. paper)
1. Metaphor in the Bible. 2. Bible. O.T.—Language, style. I. Title.
II. Series.
BS1199.R5 A33 2001
220.6’6—dc21 00–069916
CIP
Die Deutsche Bibliothek - CIP-Einheitsaufnahme
Aaron, David:
Biblical ambiguities. Metaphor, semantics and divine imagery / by David
Aaron. – Leiden ; Boston ; Köln : Brill, 2001
(The Brill reference library of ancient Judaism ; Vol. 4)
ISBN 90–04–12032-7
ISSN 1566-1237
ISBN 90 04 12032 7
© Copyright 2001 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written
permission from the publisher.
Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal
use is granted by Brill provided that
the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright
Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910
Danvers 01923, USA
Fees are subject to change.
printed in the netherlands
preface v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface....................................................................................... vii
1. Introduction: Ambiguity and Figurative Speech ............. 1
2. Distinguishing Metaphors from Non-Metaphors............. 23
3. A Non-Binary Conceptualization of Meaning................. 43
4. Toward a Model for Gradient Judgments....................... 69
5. Typicality Conditions and Relevance............................... 85
6. Metaphor as a Gradient Judgment................................... 101
7. Idolatry: The Most Challenging Metaphor ..................... 125
8. Aniconism as a Narrowing of the Conditions-of-
Relevance............................................................................ 157
9. Conclusion .......................................................................... 193
Bibliography of Works Cited................................................... 201
Index of Names and Subjects.................................................. 215
Index of Scriptural References................................................ 218
This page intentionally left blank
contents vii
PREFACE
Religions invariably seek to make true statements about the nature
of reality, the nature of a god or gods, and humanity’s place in this
universe. Consequently, religions must address the epistemological
problem of how we gain knowledge of those aspects of the world that
we cannot readily experience or understand with certainty. Most
often, one thinks of the transcendent realms as those most central
to religious discourse. But much of our rather mundane terrestrial
experience is as unknown—and, perhaps, as unknowable—as what
is usually termed transcendent. The future, for instance, is very much
a mystery, and in its own curious way, the past is an equally vast
uncertainty. Indeed, within a given religious or political community,
there can be much competition over which conceptualization of
history best serves a people’s sense of purpose. But that conflict over
history is only possible by virtue of ambiguities confronted at every
turn in the historiographic endeavor. As such, religions must address,
in some manner, the problem of our world’s ambiguities.
It does not matter whether we are discussing cosmic questions or
pondering a decision that needs our immediate attention; the fact
remains that we are constantly in a state of knowing less about
ourselves and the variables relevant to our lives than we might daily
acknowledge. The suppression of our ignorance surely constitutes a
complex coping mechanism, which, when disabled, has crippling
effects on one’s psychological health. Equally problematic can be the
overinsistence upon certainty in the face of so much obscurity. One’s
ability to handle ambiguity is undoubtedly dependent upon both
psychology and culture. Individuals differ in the extent to which they
suffer uncertainty. And while no western religion actually celebrates
the unknowability of the universe and the nihilism that might go along
with it, we should recognize that the subjects of some cultures are
more sensitive than others to the limits of human knowledge.
Though not overtly the central focus, the question of how reli-
gions and scholars of religion treat the problem of ambiguity underlies
this study. One may view the development of religious systems as
deeply rooted in the question of how indeterminacy is resolved. Only
against this backdrop can the role and purpose of metaphor be ap-
propriately framed.
Preface.p65 7 2/12/01, 10:07 AM
viii preface
The core of this book was completed during the academic year of
1995-96, while I was enjoying a year-long leave generously provid-
ed by Wellesley College. Circumstances that I now understand to
be rather typical of publishing sagas postponed its appearance for
some four years. During the summer of 1998 I incorporated some
additional bibliographic references, but this was done only in a casual,
unsystematic manner. Except for improvements made during the
editing process, the core of the book did not undergo changes after
the initial writing period. I am appreciative of the financial support
made available by the Hebrew Union College–Jewish Institute of
Religion through the Werner and Lisl Weinberg Publications Fund
and the faculty research grants that made possible the copyediting
and indexing of the manuscript in its final stages of preparation.
Professor Barbara Geller of Wellesley College read very early drafts
of parts of the manuscript. Professor Ray Jackendoff was also gra-
cious enough to consider the first complete draft. The critiques of-
fered by both of these individuals helped me rethink many crucial
questions of methodology and presentation. As a result of their read-
ings, I rewrote most of the chapters from the bottom up. I am also
grateful to Professor Ellen Schauber, who served as a publisher’s
review reader and who chose to share with me directly her reactions
and suggestions, as well as her enthusiasm for this interdisciplinary
project.
During the spring of 1996, by chance, I entered into discussions
with Professor Jacob Neusner, who had just begun working on a book
he would later publish as The Theological Grammar of the Oral Torah.
In that expansive, three-volume work, Neusner employed the ter-
minology of generative linguistics to describe the structure of rabbinic
thinking at its most rudimentary conceptual level. Through e-mail,
we discussed the best uses of linguistic terminology to frame the
ideological structure of rabbinic literature. As it turned out, Neus-
ner’s use of linguistic labels for the generative ideas within rabbinic
literature proved to function as a sustained metaphor for the rela-
tionship between language and theology more generally. In this do-
main, his insights deserve not only attention, but adaptation for other
areas of study. It was during these discussions that I first sent Pro-
fessor Neusner sections from the newly emerging draft of Biblical
Ambiguities. I wish to express my deeply felt appreciation for his
sustained interest in this work and for his continued support and
Preface.p65 8 2/12/01, 10:07 AM
preface ix
enthusiasm for this project, from its early stages through to publica-
tion.
The introduction to this book was reworked many times, but the
most recent rendering benefited from the thoughtful reflections of
Professor Susan Einbinder as well as from Professor Jerome Eckstein’s
insightful reading of the entire manuscript. To both I am deeply
grateful. Jerome Eckstein has repeatedly explored the question of
certainty, indeterminacy, and human psychology in his own philo-
sophical quest (1981, 1991). Along the way I have been assisted by
his discoveries, many of which he has shared with me in writing and
in discussions over the past twenty-four years.
It is my great pleasure to express much thankfulness to Mr. Chris
Rohmann, who brought innumerable improvements to this manu-
script through his expert skills as an editor. He is a sophisticated
reader whose ideas and questions often pushed me to articulate my
thoughts more cogently.
I have undoubtedly been unable to adequately combine the col-
lective wisdom of my teachers and readers in this work. Of course,
I alone am responsible for its final form—errors and all.
Much of this book was written when my two boys were in their
early stages of language acquisition. I learned more from them than
they could ever imagine. Witnessing the emergence of speech is not
only a joy, it is a privilege we should never take for granted. By
listening to Joshua and Elisha as they learn to navigate the nuances
of language and its relationship to the world about them, much of
what is studied in linguistics as theory became, for me, deeply rooted
in reality.
My bride, Marjorie, now knows more about ambiguity with cer-
tainty than she might ever have dreamed possible. Her support, her
encouragement, and her love are ever-sustained blessings.
D.H.A.
Cincinnati, Ohio
December 1999
Preface.p65 9 2/12/01, 10:07 AM