Tuesday, January 12, 2016

The Plot Thickens - Shadal on Tikkun Soferim

There are articles out there I have been meaning to read regarding Shadal's view of "tikkun soferim" - apparently the claim held by some midrashim and some rishonim that Chazal or pre-Chazalic soferim changed some of the language of Scripture for a variety of reasons.

This is a far-out claim that flies in the face of Maimonides' Eighth Principle that nothing in the Torah was changed since Moses received it, and so the concept is usually interpreted as "God having changed the Torah as if he was a sofer changing the language".

Shadal is a bit unclear to me. Sometimes he subscribes to some idea of "tikkun soferim". We can see this on Genesis 31:39

ואיננו רחוק שקריאת גנבתי אינה אלא תקנת סופרים, שהחכמים הראשונים התקינו שתהיה הקריאה כך כדי להרחיק המליצה התמוהה גנבתי יום וגנבתי לילה.

Apparently, this is in regard to how vowelization should be.

Of course, the most famous place that "tikkun soferim" comes up is on Genesis 18:22, where Rashi quotes it, and there is some debate on his comment if he also believed it to be Chazal who changed the Torah's words to protect God's image. Interestingly, Shadal feels that this need not be relied on, but there is another pshat:

ואברהם עודנו עומד לפני ה': במסורה ובמדרשים (לא בתלמוד) הזכירו פסוק זה בכלל י"ח מלין תיקון סופרים, וזה לשון בראשית רבא (פרשה מ"ז י"ב) אמר ר' סימון תיקון סופרים הוא זה, שהשכינה היתה ממתנת לאברהם. אמנם (כדברי הראב"ע) אין לנו צורך לתיקון סופרים, כי הנה המלאך השלישי היה גם הוא הולך לדרכו אחר שסיים דבריו לאברהם, אלא שאברהם ניגש אליו והתפלל, על כן נתעכב המלאך אצלו, ואמנם סיבת התעכבו היתה כי אברהם לא חזר לאחוריו אלא עמד וניגש אליו ודיבר דבריו.

It almost seems as if he accepts it as a concept, but he doesn't think it's necessary in this. It is interesting that he is sure to note the Talmud does not seem to have such a concept.

The plot thickens, however, when we look at Exodus 9:18, where he says that the Masoretes claim that a certain word is written without a mapik heh when it should have had one, and this proves they are innocent of having changed the text, since they could have changed the words to fix the problem. Shadal for his part thinks its accurately not a mapik heh word anyway.

הנה זו ראיה על נקיון כפיהם, שלא שלחו ידם להגיה מסברה ולהוסיף המפיק שלדעתם היה ראוי להיות בתבות הללו.


No comments:

Post a Comment