Comments on: Botany, Prophecy, and Theology

By: N. Abraha

N. Abraha — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 22:01:30 +0000

Dear Dr. Greenberg:
Thank you for extending me the opportunity for a further exchange. I subscribe to the principle that a rigorous and open discussion often deepens and sharpens our perspectives. Your article, and its methodology, brilliantly tracks the authorities that have engaged the quest for a precise understanding of arar as a concept. I am honored to be able to contribute to the ongoing discussion, and point out the stepping stones which inform me on the subject.
As you wrote in your response, I do not quite fully embrace the thought that by arar Jeremiah intended retributive justice. However, the passages lend or expose themselves to such an interpretation. Like you, I tend to view the emphasis on “hell,” as the mantra of fire and brimstone cults, a small, though vociferous, minority of the modern day Christian movement.
If I were to specify a plant fitting the arar of Jeremiah, it would have to be the “aloe,” of which the species Aloe vera is the most known. I reach the conclusion after a considered analysis. Exodus provides a methodological control for Jeremiah. (Why this is so makes for an interesting discussion in itself, but that will be a digression.) As a prelude, I would like to mention that there is a not-sufficiently-recognized overlap and/or continuity between the figures of Moses and Jeremiah. Even their names can be shown to be semantically identical. For this reason, I read Jeremiah together with Moses. In this particular instance, we find in Jeremiah shades of themes, however faint, which we would have already encountered in Exodus, in the chronicles of Moses. I suggest comparing Jeremiah 17:5-8 with Exodus 15:22-26, for instance. Exodus 15:22- 6 is about “bitter waters (Marah; merara [am-ar-ar]; mereer [am-ar-ir]) and sweet wood. (Sweet, honey = mar [am-ar])”. Reading the two texts side by side, a theme manifests, the theme of “bitterness”.
By arar, could Jeremiah have been insinuating “bitterness,” rather than “burning,” “withering away,” or “wilting?” A conclusive answer may be difficult. Yet, linguistic analysis nudges us in a certain direction. For ancient cultures, the “aloe” stood out as the standard of bitterness. Linguistically, Ethiopians know the “aloe” as ire (Tig.) or ire-t (Amh.). In speech, “bitter” taste is emphasized by repeating the word (ire-ire; iret-iret). Arar (ar-ar) too is a repeating form.
The Amharic verses corresponding to Jeremiah 17:5-8 simply contrast “a bush that wilts in the desert,” as a metaphor for those who place their trust on mortals and stray from god, with a “plant that flourishes by a river,” as metaphor for those who trust in God. Unlike the Hebrew text (assuming the Hebrew Bible contains the name arar), it specifies no plant by name. One thing is clear: the arar of Jeremiah could not have been the juniper. But, it does not rule out the aloe, the “smug, self-sufficient loner,” the “solitary, stunted forest species” of Rashi. If arar is described as a plant that “does not see when good [sweet] times (mar [am-ar]) come,” it is because the aloe is inherently a bitter plant. I do not know if the tumble thistle is of bitter taste; the Sodom apple (cursed lemon) and the tamarisk are.
“Aloes” are mentioned in the scriptures a few times, and almost always as a perfume or spice. Biblical commentaries do not always acknowledge a local source for the aloes referred to in the Bible (Ps. 45:8; Prov. 7:17; Song of Sol. 4:14), and even suggest an Asiatic tree (N. India, Malaya) for its source. Notwithstanding, the true aloe remains native to Africa. But, I cannot see why it would have been unknown in the Middle East. Aloe vera is mentioned in the Ebers Papyrus, an ancient Egyptian medical papyrus dating back to the 16th century BCE.
On a tangential note, should “ire (Eng.)” be likened to “bitterness,” or be regarded as a strain of it, the aloe may lead us on a trail into an unknown word history of the English form as well. “Irate (Eng.)” operates as a description of behavior, though not of taste. Aloe (iret) and aloe-like plants, such as the agave (sisal), itch and irritate the skin. There is more to human cultures than often meets the eye.
I look forward to insights from different angles.
Respectfully.

By: Dr. Jon Greenberg

Dr. Jon Greenberg — Sun, 25 Sep 2011 03:00:43 +0000

N. Abraha raises several interesting points, some of which call for a response. I am grateful for the observation that the Hebrew and Arabic arar have cognates (or perhaps loan words) in Latin and the two Ethiopian languages that he mentioned, meaning burned or shriveled. The mystical and folkloric associations of both juniper and arar are indisputable. It is quite likely that much of Jeremiah’s imagery and message would have resonated with his contemporaries beyond his immediate Jewish audience.

However, I should make clear that my essay was intentionally focused on Jeremiah’s use of the term, and without the trappings of later developments such as the “retributive theology” and the fiery imagery of Hell that became so prominent in Christianity. The essays posted on Torah Flora are part of what is termed in Hebrew “Talmud Torah,” or devotional study and scholarship. As such, they do not entertain the possibility that the Biblical text is somehow defective, erroneous, or inappropriately “cluttered”. Rather, the wordplay is understood as intentional and meaningful. The nature of that meaning is subject to analysis and debate, but the principle that it inheres in the text is not. I have not stipulated these limits on my writing before, and so it is certainly reasonable that my writing would appear “narrowly constructed” to readers whose background and assumptions are somewhat different from my own. I welcome these comments and look forward to additional fruitful exchanges.

By: N. Abraha

N. Abraha — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 22:52:08 +0000

I am afraid the article is narrowly constructed. This tree is a tree of pre-biblical legends. Arar, also rendered girar (Amh.), signifies the accacia tree. For unexplained reasons, it became the Thuya tree (juniper), and was associated with the Korikian nymph of Mt. Parnasus, and the Delphic Oracle in general. Both the accacia and the juniper play the same motif, and both relate to Crocus (Krokus). The mysticism of the arar as denoting the juniper is more clearly understood than the manner it appears in Jeremiah.

My sense is that the passage clutters arar with verb forms like arere (Amh.)or harere (Tig.), simply meaning “to burn”. A Latin cognate of the terms supports the same interpretation. When Jeremiah says those lacking faith will be like arar, he meant, in the tradition of retributive theology that, they will “burn,” as in hell. The passage’s association of arar with a tree seems to have been misplaced, and in all likelihood was introduced into the text inappropriately.

By: Guy Estess

Guy Estess — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:40:10 +0000

You genuinely make it appear so fabulous with your presentation, but I find this issue to be really something which I think I would never understand. It seems too involved and very broad for me. I am looking forward for your future post; I will try to get the knack of it.

By: Rabbi Moshe Brody

Rabbi Moshe Brody — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 12:47:36 +0000

Dear Dr. Greenberg:
I perused your website and found it very exciting as well. I’m sure that the time will come and I will need your assistance in identifying something or the other in the Torah or Chazal. May Hashem grant you further success in your promotion of Torah and Kevod Shamayaim! In the meantime I enjoyed reading some of your articles and look forward to reading further. Hatzlacha. Rabbi Moshe Brody

By: Scott Henderson

Scott Henderson — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:44:42 +0000

Thank for taking the time to share that. I really enjoyed that and will use that in my daily life

By: Chana

Chana — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 20:56:06 +0000

J.G.
How much I have enjoyed this essay on the plant
referred to in Jeremiah 17:5-8.
Thank you!
Chana