More Menorah

by peacefulpete 5 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  peacefulpete

  Another brief example of ancient traditions reinterpreted by worshipers of Yahweh.

  The book of Exodus 25:

  31 ¶ And thou shalt make a lampstand of pure gold; of beaten work shall the lampstand be made; its base and its branches, its bowls, its knops, and its flowers shall be of the same.
  32 And six branches shall come out of the sides of it, three branches of the lampstand out of the one side and three branches of the lampstand out of the other side,
  33 three bowls made like unto almonds with a knop and a flower in one branch, and three bowls made like almonds in the other branch with a knop and a flower; thus in the six branches that come out of the lampstand.
  34 And in the lampstand shall be four bowls made like unto almonds with their knops and their flowers.
  35 And there shall be a knop under two branches of the same, and another knop under two branches of the same, and another knop under two branches of the same, according to the six branches that proceed out of the lampstand.
  36 Their knops and their branches shall be of the same; all of it shall be one beaten work of pure gold.
  37 And thou shalt make its seven lamps; and they shall light its lamps, that they may give light over against it.

  Ok, so there is this strangely detailed description of a sacred golden lampstand, with 7 lamps in a strict formation of 3 branches on each side a single 7th in the center. The whole lampstand was covered in symmetrical decorations of almond tree blossoms, fruit (nuts/nobs). Naturally many have pondered why this particular design. What was the symbolism?

  It was long suggested a connection to Ashera, the goddess often associated with trees especially fruiting ones as a symbol of sexual fertility. This is a huge topic if anyone wishes to pursue it, but to be brief, iconography from throughout the ancient Near East suggest that often the trees were pruned and shaped in a particular fashion to represent the goddess. Typical of the period is illustrated with the iconography from Kuntillet Ajrud (800 BCE) which has the added element of referring to Yahweh and his Ashera (wife/lover).

  
  

  The Asherah, the Menorah and the Sacred Tree - Joan E. Taylor, 1995

  Regarding the 7 lamps/candles, the significance of the number 7 in many religious contexts prevents any definitive explanation, however the one assumed by Philo may be sufficient for this discussion:

  (WHO IS THE HEIR OF DIVINE THINGS)

  XLVI (215) For the divisions into two equal parts which have been mentioned become six in number, since three animals were divided, so that the Word which divided them made up the number seven, dividing the two triads and establishing itself in the midst of them. ......(221) This much alone we must remind our readers of at this moment, that the sacred candlestick and the seven lights upon it are an imitation of the wandering of the seven planets through the heaven. How so? some one will say. (222) Because, we will reply, in the same manner as the lights, so also does every one of the planets shed its rays. They therefore, being more brilliant, do transmit more brilliant beams to the earth, and brilliant beyond them all is he who is the center one of the seven, the sun. (223) And I call him the center, not merely because he has the central position, as some have thought, but also because he has on many other accounts a right to be ministered unto and attended by the others accompanying him as bodyguards on each side, by reason of his dignity and his magnitude, and the great benefits which he pours upon all earthly things. (224) But men, being unable completely to comprehend the arrangement of the planets (and in fact what other of the heavenly bodies can they understand with certainty and clearness?) speak according to their conjectures. And these persons appear to me to form the best conjectures on such subjects, who, having assigned the central position to the sun, say that there is an equal number of planets, namely, those above him and below him. Those above him being Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars; then comes the Sun himself, and next to him Mercury, Venus, and the Moon, which last is close to the air. (225) The Creator therefore, wishing that there should be a model upon earth among us of the seven-lighted sphere as it exists in heaven, explained this exquisite work to be made, namely, this candlestick. And its likeness to the soul is often pointed out too; for the soul is divisible into three parts, and each of the parts, as has been already pointed out, is divided into two more. And thus there being six divisions, the sacred and divine Word, the divider of them all, very naturally makes up the number seven.

  
  

  Here Philo relates how the 5 visible planets and the moon represented the branches and the Sun aka the Logos/Word was the center.

  In short, we have evidence that the Temple menorah design was a representation of a fruiting, stylized Ashera tree. The 7 lamps may well have represented the 7 principle astrological lights. Philo and his contemporaries (like Christians) had further associated the Logos with the sun.

  Does this example suggest the writers of the Torah objected to reinterpretation of ancient enduring symbols? The Temple menorah was a stylized Ashera tree. Vegetal associations with life and fertility are similarly behind the modern Christian use of the Christmas tree. I don't see the difference myself.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  It's very possible. The Jews could likely have done this. You actually took the easy way out.

  By finding something that looked like what the Jews developed, you "found" a "menorah." This is something that is quite logical. We don't know, of course, but it is possible. However, that I do want to add the following about why this is funny altogether...especially since Chanukah (Hanukkah? Kanike?--Yes, that last one is a real spelling. Yikes!)

  A Confusing Text in Hebrew that Doesn't Read "Straight" and "Is Missing Pieces"

  What I hate about English translations of the Bible is that they sound like Cecil B. DeMille is trying to make a religious movie out of it--stuffy, proper, showy, well-designed, on-stage. It doesn't take a scholar or academic to learn Hebrew or Greek. You can learn to pronounce the letters of either in about an hour or two and be reading in an afternoon. Hebrew especially is very simple. The rules never change.

  But expect be disappointed sometimes. The Bible doesn't read the same in the original languages as it does in the translations. Ever heard of "lost in translation." This is sort of the opposite. While you gain a lot of insight, you also lose the fakery and puffery those versions of Scripture often try to "frost" the Bible with.

  One of the parts of the Bible that they do this to is the part of the "menorah," Exodus 25:31-40. You think you know what a menorah is, right? It's because you've seen one.

  Or, you think you have. That is why you think it looks like what you pictured above. (You just think you found what looks like a "menorah," but you just wait!)

  Ha ha ha. You're wrong. Guess what. This is one of those parts of the Bible that when you learn to read the original Hebrew it will leave you scratching your head: "Did I not learn something correctly? Is my Hebrew Bible missing something? Maybe I should ask somebody something about this." Bits and pieces seem to be missing. It seems to be saying things again and again and yet nothing. You read words and words and words and yet you read nothing. You end up just wanting to rip the words up and eat them so you can poop them out.

  Yep. If you don't understand what you just read and can't describe what was described to you when you get to it, then you read it correctly:

  The menorah is described in great and even confusing detail two times in the Torah. This is an almost compulsive word picture, whether in translation or in the original Hebrew. The constant repetition of the need to have almond-shaped cups, bulbs, and flowers is especially opaque.--Menorah, It's "Branches" and Their Cosmic Significance: TheTorah.com.

  It's the oy-vey of Bible reading. According to a metaphor in the Midrash Tanḥuma, the reason why it reads so confusing is that when God showed him the object and wanted him to write down what he saw, Moses himself didn't know what he was looking at. Nahmanides also agreed, as did the twelfth century scholar Moses Maimonides (whose name may sound similar) and drew schematics that looked similar to giant those Chanukah menorahs you see today placed around cities and towns that have angular shapes instead of curved arms. (It looked like something out of the 1960s space age instead of the Middle Ages--not kidding!)

  One of the reasons we accept a seven-branched "curved" arm menorah is not because the Jews originally created such one for their Temple or borrowed such from heathens or pagans (though that would have been a good idea--and they might have if they were smart). But it appears the idea came from something as simple as a lack of space.

  What Do King Arthur and King Solomon Have in Common?

  While King Arthur is a legendary figure, there is a tiny bit of historical evidence that suggests that he may be based on a genuine Saxon hero of the past. The same is true of King Solomon. It appears that while we have some evidence that he was a genuine son of David, everything else we know about him is legendary--yes, even in the Bible...and that means all the stories about his kingdom and the Temple.

  This means there was no menorah--at least no menorah from Solomon's Temple like you imagine (sorry, JWs).

  We do know that there was one from the days of the Hasmoneans--you know, the one's who gave us Chanukah (though the "miracle" of the 8 days is another story). By their time we believe we might have a menorah similar to what we know today. Did they just get one from the heathens by then? Not likely since they just had that war with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and purged everything out of Judea that was not "Jewish." So where did it come from if Solomon was a legend?

  The earliest image of a menorah appears on a coin of the Hasmonean Mattathias Antigonus (39 BCE), who minted a small bronze coin. It is after that that the "common" image of the "curved" menorah becomes the standard.

  Was this the menorah that was always the type the Jews used before? Who knows. But it fits on a coin--and thus it became the "emblem" of a nation. Not the Star of David, but the menorah.

  And that is likely how it happened. The coin, which was how the ancients of the time advertised their king or ruler, shaping their idol image, was used to shape the menorah. Other nations could put an image of the deity/ruler on their coins. But Jews would not. Their stamp was the stamp of light, the light of liberty.

  When the Romans took the sacred things from Herod's Temple, they purposefully marked the Arch of Titus with this image of liberty and light, the Menorah, to show that the Jews had been conquered. If you note, the menorah was shaped like that found on the coin of the Hasmoneans:

  

  
• 

  peacefulpete

  I'm going to disagree on your assessment of the likelihood of antiquity of the menorah design. I do recognize the mythic aspects, such as the expansive united monarchy, but given the extrabiblical evidence for the worship of Yahweh (and Ashera), it would be more incredible if they had not had some kind of temple much like described, filled with cherubim, pomegranates, brazen bulls, sacred pillars and Ashera shaped lampstand. Maybe not covered in gold but the pattern and iconography are typical of the region. Whether that design dated to the 7th or the 10th century is not really important.

  Actually, none of it is important, but for the sake of some here who think it is, I post stuff like this.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Well, like those missionaries who came to my door and, after I pointed out that they misrepresented the Hebrew they were claiming they said they knew--and I pulled out my copy of the Torah and kindly pointed out their error, one of them said to me, very angrily:

  "WHAT DO YOU JEWS KNOW ABOUT THE BIBLE?!"

  What you just posted is like telling a Native American they don't know the facts about their own history or have it wrong and you, a foreigner, know better than they do.

  I tip my hat to you and everyone who agrees with you, believing that this represents rational thinking.
• 

  Anony Mous

  @Kaleb: there is a difference between history according to archeology and history according to scripture and then what some people re-interpret history to be based on either or combinations of those sources.

  What do Native Americans know about their own history - not much, most of it is told from an anti-Western narratives, few of the Native American tribes had a writing system, let alone a historical record, most were nomadic and continuously at war with each other, trying to eradicate or enslave the other. I’m sure they have stories that are wonderful and self-praising how great their ancestors were to start the best civilization in history - until the Spanish came and submitted them in record time because they had technology like armor and muskets that made the Spanish and later the French and English practically gods in comparison.

  The Jews did a lot better, as writing had been invented already a few times in that region, but once you go before 300BC, which is when the scripture as we know them today were ‘edited’ into the current canon, it becomes a lot less clear what is myth, history or a little bit of both, and that is not even accounting for the fact that Jews and interpretation as we know it today didn’t become established until after the destruction of Jerusalem, so there is 500 years or so of unwritten change and re-interpretation, which is why Judaism looks so differently today than it would have when Herod’s temple was in place.
• 

  peacefulpete

  Kaleb...No offense intended my friend.

  The reading in Exodus could have been better written (edited?) but the essential description is fairly clear. (Numbers is pretty brief) I enjoyed the midrash comments that depict Moses' inability to understand the instructions. The proposed visual aids offered him add a humorous touch. Not speaking Hebrew I don't how narrowly the word 'shown' in vs 40 needs be understood, but I can see the same word used in vs 9 in regards the entire tabernacle and furnishings design. That suggests either the word doesn't necessarily imply a vision or conversely the entire section was perceived as a vision at some point. Regardless, it was an entertaining midrash about the confusing description. Thanks for sharing.

  Did they just get one from the heathens by then? Not likely since they just had that war with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and purged everything out of Judea that was not "Jewish."

  The temple and the menorah were entirely "Jewish" regardless the ancient roots of the decorations and design.

  By finding something that looked like what the Jews developed, you "found" a "menorah."

  The associations with an 8th century Ashera specifically connected to Yahweh that roughly matches the description from 5th century Exodus, and that also bears a strong resemblance to the menorah design in use in the 2nd century BCE is pretty decent evidence. It also offers a reasonable explanation for the vigorously detailed vegetal decoration. The evidence seems just as persuasive as that used to connect the Christmas tree with Druid use of evergreens in their religious ceremonies. That was the point of this thread after all.