tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post4030784269871323621..comments2024-03-05T21:22:43.426-05:00Comments on parshablog: Who was the Kushite woman? And how did she turn black?joshwaxmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03516171362038454070noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-55945841138118682452014-03-26T20:21:33.880-04:002014-03-26T20:21:33.880-04:001. maybe, but on what basis? is there a pasuk (not...1. maybe, but on what basis? is there a pasuk (not this one) or linguistic cognate to argue for this meaning? the midrash understand it as a euphemism.<br /><br />3. it reads more like a gloss than a quotation. but this is the sort of gloss which can be inserted even by the original author. specifically because we don't have the background that he took an Isha Kushit, rather than surprise us, the author adds this in.<br /><br />4. since the vulgate is a translation, i would consider it more likely that the translator removed the extraneous restatement than that the original text lacked it. in general, the masoretic text i would consider more authoritative.<br /><br />onkelos meanwhile is not evidence that the text is a gloss. rather, when he writes אֲרֵי אִתְּתָא שַׁפִּירְתָא דִּנְסֵיב, רַחֵיק, it is an attempt the bring the traditional midrashic explanation of LAKACH as divorced (רַחֵיק) in line with the more literal peshat explanation married (דִּנְסֵיב). So he works both into his translation, and rather than being "he kept her at a distance", it is idiomatic and means "for the beautiful woman he had married (literal meaning) he had divorced (midrashic meaning)."<br /><br />All the best,<br />Josh<br />joshwaxmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149022516101476797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-40842971070917091162014-03-24T05:01:05.032-04:002014-03-24T05:01:05.032-04:00I enjoyed this fascinating post. I'm curious h...I enjoyed this fascinating post. I'm curious how you interpret the text.<br /><br />Please forgive these four questions slightly off topic questions:<br /><br />1. Might כוש, כושי, and כושית originally mean "handsome" or "beautiful" in the Bible with the ethnic meanings derived from the personal name?<br /><br />2. Must Numbers 12:1 must refer either to a Kushite other than Tzipporah or to Tzipporah? If Moses married a Kushite before Tzipporah and Tzipporah is a Kushite in some sense, it seems to me the text might refer to both, particularly if Moses didn't consummate his marriage with the Kushite or didn't have children by her and now was not engaging in relations with Tzipporah.<br /><br />3. Can "ki isha kushit lakach" be read as quotation?<br /><br />4. How do we know "ki isha kushit lakach" didn't originate as a gloss? The text is absent in the Vulgate, and Targum Onkelos expands the text clarifying that "he kept [her] at a distance."<br /><br />Thank you for any insights,<br /><br />Wellington Kingwang.sejonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08368979952278255155noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5589564.post-13138063165443306572009-06-10T09:46:48.122-04:002009-06-10T09:46:48.122-04:00In Israel, the Bedouins tend to be a darker shade ...In Israel, the Bedouins tend to be a darker shade than the city Arabs . I suppose there is an adaptive natural selection process. Something to do with UV light and Folic Acid destruction, probably. So a bedouin woman who is dark will be more fertile on the long run. <br />Long term tanning also has an effect. I have a tan on my forearms than never disappears.michaelnoreply@blogger.com