reading

PREFACE

The following study is a revised and abbreviated version of my doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Innsbruck in October 2016. Its main purpose is to explore the exegetical and theological significance of the final parenesis of Deuteronomy (10,12-11,32) in the composition of Deuteronomy. I am grateful to the editors of the series Forschung zur Bibel, Prof. Dr. Georg Fischer and Prof. Dr. Thomas Söding, for accepting this work for publication.

The completion of this study is the culmination of four years of intense academic formation during which time God has helped me through many individuals in order to make this study possible. First among them is Univ.– Prof. Dr. Georg Fischer, SJ, who directed this study with much wisdom and insight, and I will be forever grateful for the chance to train for lifelong scholarship and teaching under his care and direction. His scholarly contribution, with deep exegetical insights and subtle observations, has provided an unfailing source of inspiration. To study under him was a privilege and I owe a lot to him for his guidance during this study.

I am particularly indebted to Dr. Dominik Markl, SJ, Professor of the Old Testament at the Pontifical Biblical Institute, Rome, who consented to be the second supervisor of this study. I have enjoyed the extended discussions with him, and he has helped to sharpen my thinking and contributed to overcoming various hurdles in this study. I am grateful for his encouragement, assistance and readiness to oblige.

My sincere thanks are due to Prof. Dr. Robert Althann, SJ, Prof. Dr. Kurien Kunnumpuram, SJ, Dr. Barbara Hagemeister and Dr. Saji Kizhakkayil, who read the draft attentively and made valuable suggestions for improvement.

The Jesuit community in Innsbruck helped me with their generous hospitallity, fraternal love and scholarly atmosphere to bring this work to completion. I remember gratefully the Late Fr. Severin Leitner, SJ, (R.I.P) who invited me to pursue doctoral studies in Innsbruck and welcomed me to the community at the Jesuitenkolleg. I should also like to express my sincere gratitude for the generous encouragement given to me by Rev. Fr. Markus Inama, SJ, the Rector and my fellow Jesuits in Jesuitenkolleg, Innsbruck.

Many more are my Jesuit brethren to whom I am deeply indebted: the Provincial of the South Asian Assistancy and his team, the Provincial and members of the Kerala province, my colleagues in Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth, Pune. They sustained me throughout my study with constant encouragement, companionship and fraternal love. This is also an opportunity for me to acknowledge the support and affection of Rev. Dr. Hansruedi Kleiber, S.J., during my stay in Luzern, and the financial assistance that he rendered for the publication of this study.

I am also grateful and deeply indebted to my family and friends who strengthened me with their love, support and prayers during these years of academic work and personal growth. I wish to dedicate this work to my beloved intercessors in heaven, my dearly beloved mother Mariyakutty, my brothers Joy, Abraham, Augustine and my little sister Princy. To their “ever living memory”, I owe a debt of gratitude.

Now, to the One Who is worthy of all praise, may he be exalted through this study: “He is your praise and He is your God, who has done for you these great and awesome things which your eyes have seen” (הוא תהלתך והוא אלהיך אשׁר־עשׂה אתך את־הגדלת ואת־הנוראת האלה אשׁר ראו עיניך: Deut 10,21).

Thomas Karimundackal, SJ

Jnana-Deepa Vidyapeeth

Pontifical Athenaeum of Philosophy and Religion

Pune

May 2017

CONTENTS

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

1. Choice of the subject

2. Why this pericope?

3. Goal of the study

4. Methodology and areas of the research

5. Itinerary of the study

CHAPTER 1
APPROACHING THE TEXT

1. The delimitation of the examined text

1.1 Deut 10,12 - the beginning of the fifth parenesis

1.2 Deut 11,32 - the end of the fifth parenesis

1.3 Internal coherence of the unit

2. The context of Deut 10,12-11,32

2.1 The preceding context

2.1.1 Israel’s self-righteousness and Yhwh’s grace

2.1.2 Israel’s faithlessness and Yhwh’s faithfulness

2.1.3 Resumption of Israel’s journey

2.1.4 Explicit connections between 9,1-10,11 and 10,12-11,32

2.2 The succeeding context

2.2.1 Explicit connections between 10,12-11,32 and 12,1-31

2.2.2 Distinguishing characteristics of Deut 12,1-13,1

2.2.3 Conclusion

3. Translation and text-critical notes on the text

3.1 Qumran Manuscripts

3.2 Translation and textual notes

3.3 Observations on the MT and the Smr

3.3.1 Harmonizing alterations

3.3.2 Alterations related to content and ideology

3.3.3 Linguistic corrections

3.3.4 Orthographical changes

3.3.5 Alterations by the omission of words

3.4 Observations on the MT and the LXX

3.4.1 Harmonizing alterations

3.4.2 Theological interpretation

3.4.3 Alterations by additions

3.4.4 Linguistic corrections

3.5 Observations on the MT and the Qumran texts

3.5.1 Orthographical changes

3.5.2 Harmonizing alterations

3.5.3 Resemblance to the LXX and the Smr

3.5.4 Alterations by addition/omission of words and linguistic correction

3.5.5 Variations among the Qumran manuscripts

3.6 Conclusion

CHAPTER 2
THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF DEUT 10,12-11,32

1. The structure of Deut 10,12-11,32

1.1 Criteria for textual division

1.2 Structural division of Deut 10,12-11,32

1.2.1 Space

1.2.2 Time

1.2.3 Persons

1.2.4 Communication

1.2.5 Vocabulary

1.3 A closer look at the sub-sections

1.3.1 Deut 10,12-22: Israel’s need for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.3.2 Deut 11,1-7: Israel’s challenge for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.3.3 Deut 11,8-17: Israel’s prospect for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.3.4 Deut 11,18-25: Israel’s accountability for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.3.5 Deut 11,26-32: Israel’s choice for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.4 Proposed structural outline of Deut 10,12-11,32

2. The Dynamics of Deut 10,12-11,32

2.1 The beginning and the end

2.2 Temporal movement

2.3 Spatial movement

2.4 Character movement

2.4.1 God

2.4.2 Israel

2.5 Repetition and intensification

2.6 Thematic movement

2.7 Conclusion

CHAPTER 3
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE TEXT

1. Deut 10,12-22: Israel’s need for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.1 Deut 10,12-13: Requirements for a Yhwh-centred existence

1.1.1 Deut 10,12-13 in the Parenesis (Deut 6-11)

1.1.2 What does the Lord your God demand from you? (v12ab)

1.1.3 Principles of a Yhwh-centred existence

1.2 Deut 10,14-15: Yhwh’s sovereignty and his elective grace

1.2.1 Sovereignty of the Lord over the universe

1.2.2 Yhwh’s elective grace upon Israel

1.3 Deut 10,16: Circumcise your heart

1.3.1 Circumcise the foreskin of your heart

1.3.2 Stiffen your neck no more

1.4 Deut 10,17-18: Yhwh’s uniqueness and sovereignty

1.5 Deut 10,19-20: Love the sojourner and commit yourself to the Lord

1.6 Deut 10,21-22: Yhwh’s uniqueness and his mighty deeds

2. Deut 11,1-7: Israel’s challenge for a Yhwh-centered existence

2.1 Deut 11,1: Love the Lord and keep his charges

2.2 Deut 11,2-7: To know the mighty deeds of the Lord

2.2.1 Structure and syntax of 11,2-7

2.2.2 You shall know today for it is not your children … (v2ac)

2.2.3 Deut 11,2d-3a: Yhwh’s greatness and primacy

2.2.4 Deut 11,3b-7: Yhwh’s redemptive grace and judgment

3. Deut 11,8-17: Israel’s prospect of a Yhwh-centred existence

3.1 Deut 11,8-12: Obedience and the gift of the land

3.1.1 Deut 11,8-9: Obedience and long life in the land

3.1.2 Deut 11,10-12: Description of the land

3.2 Deut 11,13-15: Obedience and prosperity in the land

3.3 Deut 11,16-17: Warning against apostasy

4. Deut 11,18-25: Israel’s accountability for a Yhwh-centred existence

4.1 Deut 11,18-21: Regular instructions of the law

4.2 Deut 11,22-25: Keep the commandments and possess the land

5. Deut 11,26-32: Israel’s choice of a Yhwh-centred existence

5.1 Deut 11,26-28: Choice of blessing and curse

5.2 Deut 11,29-32: Yhwh’s giving of the land and Israel’s response.

5.2.1 Deut 11,29-31: Ceremonial blessing and curse

5.2.2 Deut 11,32: Final appeal to observe the commandments

CHAPTER 4
THEOLOGICAL SYNTHESIS AND ACTUALIZATION OF DEUT 10,12-11,32

1. Deut 10,12-11,32 as a summation of Deut 1,1-10,11 and a link to Deut 12,1-34,12

1.1 Common elements

1.2 The expressions unique to Deut 10,12-11,32 and their significance

1.3 Conclusion

2. Deut 10,12-11,32: a key to the theology of Deuteronomy

2.1 The incomparable Yhwh – the portrait of Yhwh ,

2.1.1 Deut 10,12-22: a sovereign - just - unique Yhwh

2.1.2 Deut 11,1-7: a great redeemer Yhwh

2.1.3 Deut 11,8-17: a caring, ‘angry’ Yhwh

2.1.4 Deut 11,18-25: a mighty - fearsome Yhwh

2.1.5 Deut 11,26-32: a faithful Yhwh

2.1.6 Conclusion

2.2 Israel – a chosen people

2.2.1 Israel – Yhwh’s chosen people

2.2.2 Israel – a people called upon to make a commitment to Yhwh

2.2.3 Conclusion

2.3 The land as the gift of Yhwh: the land in Deut 10,12-11,32

2.3.1 The land belongs to Yhwh

2.3.2 The land as a gift of Yhwh

2.3.3 The land as a fulfilment of the promise to the fathers

2.3.4 The land as a gift in return for allegiance to Yhwh

2.3.5 The land as a good and prosperous land

2.3.6 The land as an object of Yhwh’s special care

2.3.7 Conclusion

2.4 The law and obedience as requirement of a Yhwh-centred existence

2.5 Justice as the expression of a ‘just’ Yhwh

2.6 Blessing or curse – a choice to be made

2.8 Worship of Yhwh - a manifestation of true allegiance to Yhwh

2.9 Conclusion

3. Actualization: theological implications of Deut 10,12-11,32

3.1 Cherishing the Divine-human relationship

3.2 Sharing the resources of the earth

3.3 Be compassionate to the needy and the disadvantaged

ABBREVIATIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

1. Choice of the subject

The book of Deuteronomy is arguably the pivotal book for the entire Old Testament, both for its content and its theology. The theological skill and genius of the authors can be recognized in the manner of its composition. The theological assertions of the book are mostly concentrated in chs. 4.30. 32, and in the parenetical section of Deuteronomy (6-11), and their theological focus gives profound insights into and directions for Israel’s need for a Yhwh-centred existence. While the pareneses¹ in Deut 6-11 reflects a tone of individual persuasion, it also recognizes the importance of the community. Every individual and each segment of the community is exhorted to obey the terms and conditions of the covenant for the survival of the community itself.

The large block of the pareneses in Deut 6-11 can be divided into five subsequent parenesis (6,1-25; 7,1-26; 8,1-20; 9,1-10,11; 10,12-11,32), showing various aspects of the nature of a lasting covenant relationship between Yhwh and Israel, namely its foundation, essence and perpetuation. While 6,1-25 lies at the very heart of the relationship between Yhwh and Israel, in 7,1-26 Moses warns Israel against apostasy and exhorts them to be distinctive because it is with them that Yhwh made a covenant. In 8,1-20 Israel is asked always to remember Yhwh’s mercy to them, and in 9,1-10,11 Moses reminds them that they are a stubborn people, yet chosen and spared by Yhwh’s grace.

For this study, I limit myself to the final section of the pareneses in Deuteronomy (10,12-11,32), while keeping in mind the development of the entire pareneses in chs. 6-11. Deut 10,12-11,32 emphasizes the twofold dimension of the perpetuation of Israel’s covenantal relationship with Yhwh, namely Israel’s allegiance to Yhwh and more fundamentally Yhwh’s gracious, sustaining hand towards Israel. Israel must seek and make a total commitment to Yhwh - the great, just, mighty and awesome God, who is faithful in keeping his promises - lest they not live long in the Promised Land. The inheritance of the land, which is a gracious gift from Jhwh, and their life in it call for a loving service of Yhwh. In short, the land which Israel is going to enter calls for a Yhwh-centred existence, and it solely depends on Israel’s choice of Yhwh and their decision to follow his commandments.

2. Why this pericope?

Scholarship on Deuteronomy² in the past unravelled various dimensions of the pareneses in Deuteronomy and interpreted their relevance for the reader of their times. The fruit of the research can be easily found in various dissertations³ and biblical commentaries,⁴ reflecting various approaches to the pareneses in Deuteronomy. While these research materials are in general helpful and constructive, the exposition of 10,12-11,32 in these materials hardly achieved a comprehensive understanding of the text. Moreover, a synchronic examination of Deut 10,12-11,32 is very often limited to the framework of their projects as a whole. In addition to this, there is no monograph or hardly any research article on Deut 10,12-11,32 discussing its various aspects.⁵ The present study intends to meet this need.

Above all, scholars are often puzzled by the complexity of this unit - its rhetoric, form, style and language. Various theological themes, such as the nature of God, the covenantal requirements of the Lord, Divine-human commitment, Promised Land, obedience to the Law/commandments, justice and concern for the less privileged in society, instruction to children, blessing and curse, etc. are interwoven in this episode and call for an appropriate theological interpretation of the composition of Deuteronomy. Deut 10,12-11,32 could be considered as a summary of the preceding sections, and a link to the succeeding sections of Deuteronomy. Therefore, this unit could be taken as a hermeneutical key to understand and to interpret the theology of Deuteronomy.

3. Goal of the study

On the one hand, this study is intended to examine critically various scholarly contributions to the text, and on the other hand it looks into the synchronic aspects of the text on both macro and micro levels. Thus, the objectives of the study can be summed up as follows:

1. to carry out a synchronic analysis of the text

2. to arrive at a coherent theological interpretation of the intent of the text

3. to point out the theological significance of the text in the larger context of Deuteronomy and its interpretation

4. to trace possible connections and relations of the text within the compositional frame of Deuteronomy and to the rest of the Old Testament

5. to draw out its contextual meaning and significance for the world of today which is increasingly becoming pluri-religious and multicultural.

4. Methodology and areas of the research

Following a synchronic approach, this thesis focuses on a textual study of Deut 10,12-11,32 in its final form.⁶ The text is interpreted taking into account its grammatical, syntactic and semantic particularities. Reading the text intra-textually and inter-textually, this study looks into the contextual and theological significance of 10,12-11,32 in Deuteronomy. Throughout this study the text is read and interpreted while keeping in mind the ‘faith-purpose’ of the authors of Deuteronomy.⁷

Therefore, a synchronic analysis will be carried out through:

1. the delimitation and the contextual analysis of the text

2. the translation and text-critical analysis of the text

3. the dynamics and structural analysis of the text

4. the literary and narrative analysis of the text

5. the inter-textual analysis of the text

6. the theological interpretation of the text and its applications for the reader of today

5. Itinerary of the study

This study is organized in four chapters. The first chapter concentrates on a threefold examination of Deut 10,12-11,32, namely the delimitation of the text, its context, and its translation with text-critical observations and evaluations. The delimitation and the contextual analysis of the text is to show that Deut 10,12-11,32 is an independent literary unit and that it is placed meaningfully within a larger literary block of Deuteronomy with a theological purpose. The Hebrew text is translated as faithfully as possible, and relevant text-critical observations are made in order to show that the investigated text reflects the original one in the closest way.

In the second chapter the structure of the text is examined and its dynamics are pointed out. The literary division of the text is carried out by applying various criteria, such as changes in the character, time, place, theme, narrative communication, vocabulary etc. It is followed by identifying the movement of the text as a whole and various movement patterns within the subunits. Criteria like communication structure, sequence of time, change of place, privileged positions - especially beginning and end - formal structure, development of themes, succession of words and phrases and their connections, continuations, intensifications, contrasts etc. are used to identify various elements of the movement within the text.

In the third chapter the text is interpreted verse by verse or by taking smaller units in accordance with the structure arrived at. At every stage of interpretation each subunit is taken up separately, and then its literary characteristics are examined from a synchronic perspective. This is followed by a detailed grammatical, syntactic and semantic analysis of key words, phrases and clauses to bring out their exegetical and theological significance in Deuteronomy.

The final chapter concludes the study by summarizing its exegetical and theological findings. First of all it illustrates the hermeneutical function of 10,12-11,32 in Deuteronomy. Secondly, in the context of the various elements of the Deuteronomic theology different theological themes of 10,12-11,32 are briefly presented and summed up, and it is shown how 10,12-11,32 serve as a key to the theology of Deuteronomy. Finally a short theological reflection on the text and its relevance for a contemporary reader is offered from a faith perspective.

¹ For a survey of various attempts to define the term parenesis in Deuteronomy, see TIFFANY, Parenesis, 3-19. Having evaluated the earlier approaches to define the term parenesis, Tiffany defines parenesis as “a second person, direct address form which appeals to the will of the addressee (individual or community) and whose intention is to urge obedience to or to discourage transgression of an order”, ibid., 312; see also ibid., 19-25, 307-313. According to him, considering the textual intention, which is expressed both in content and syntax, parenesis differs from an ‘order’ which is also normally addressed in the second person. While an order is given by means of a command or prohibition to establish a norm of action, parenesis focuses not on the norm of action but on the addressee to motivate and encourage him/her to comply with an order, cf. ibid., 307-308; see also ibid., 20-22. However, the legitimacy of his distinction between parenesis and order is questionable, as we see a formal mixing of the two in many instances in Deut 5-11. See DEROUCHIE, Call, 95-200, for a detailed text-linguistic analysis of Deut 5-11 which merges these two without a significant semantic distinction between them. For a grammatical distinction between parenesis and order, see RICHTER, Recht, 190. For third person command forms, see GERSTENBERGER, Wesen, 66-70.

² For a comprehensive survey of the the historical development of scholarship on Deuteronomy up to the present, see OTTO, Deuteronomium I, 62-230.

³I would like to mention only a few of them which significantly contributed to the synchronic study of the pareneses in Deuteronomy. The seminal work of Lohfink’s Pontifical Biblical Institute dissertation, Hauptgebot, initiated a new approach to the entire scholarship of Deuteronomy by providing a formal and stylistic analysis of Deut 5-11. Like Lohfink, López in his Pontifical Biblical Institute dissertation, Un Dios, continued to analyze the key terms, forms and literary patterns in Deut 6-11 and established many more layers in Deuteronomy’s compositional history. Building on his doctoral dissertation López has published a series of articles concerning the style, literary structure, and redactional history of Deut 5-11 to point out the level of compositional unity in these chapters, cf. Deutéronome, RB 84, 481-522; idem, Deutéronome, 5-49; idem, Deut VI, 161-200; idem, Deut VI, 59-91; idem, En los umbrales, 37-64; idem, Dt 8, 21-54; idem, Peuple, 438-463. Tiffany in his dissertation, Parenesis, attempted to provide a form critical and structural analysis of Deut 5-11 on the basis of the parenetical discourses in Deut 5-11. DeRouchie in his dissertation, Call, tries to establish the literary structure and theological agenda of Deut 5-11 on objective linguistic grounds such as form, semantic meaning, and discourse function of a number of linguistic features. The following studies are also contributed significantly to the understanding of the parenetical discourses in Deut 5-11, although their focus is diachronic: RANCK, Relationship; ACHENBACH, Israel; MERENDINO, Dt V-VI, 80-83; PECKHAM, composition, 217-240; BREKELMANS, Deuteronomy 5, 164-173; VERMEYLEN, Narratives, 174-207.

⁴ For a list of the relevant commentaries, see the section on commentaries in the Bibliography.

⁵ As far as I know there is only one research article that specifically deals with the final parenesis, and that especially unravels the elements of the theology of the covenant, cf. VEIJOLA, Bundestheologie, 206-221. However, this article is elaborated with regard to 10,12-11,32 in his commentary on Deuteronomy, cf. VEIJOLA, Deuteronomium, 242-259.

⁶ Various steps in the development of this study follow closely the guidelines proposed by FISCHER, Wege, 1-34.

⁷ Interpretation, 91-92.107-108.