Home Jewish Studies „Die niedere Kritik“
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

„Die niedere Kritik“

  • Hanna Liss
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Deutsch-jüdische Bibelwissenschaft
This chapter is in the book Deutsch-jüdische Bibelwissenschaft

Abstract

Although the study of the Hebrew Bible never formed the center of formal Jewish education, it had always been part of it. In the Middle Ages, Masoretic Bibles as well as Masoretic compilations were studied and introduced in Jewish Medieval commentaries under a variety of names. Jewish commentators dealt differently with Masoretic notes. Whereas some of them made use of the Masorah in order to support rabbinic traditions that seemed to be tied to the biblical text only loosely, others dealt with the Masorah in the way modern scholarship would do, i. e., to take the Masoretic notes as a “fence around the written Torah”. Overall, the Masoretic Text was regarded as an essential component of the Bible although it was considered an offspring of later Jewish tradition. Still in the 18th century, Moses Mendelssohn in his introduction to the translation of the Pentateuch (1782) had argued that the oral tradition of the Masoretic text had served as a guarantor for the text’s purity, and had safeguarded the text from any later corruption. In contrast, the Protestant Bible scholar J. G. Eichhorn had argued that especially the oral transmission of the biblical text was the source of its corruption, and critical scholarship was obliged to emend the corrupt text. At the end of the 18th century at the latest, the Masoretic hyper-text was deprived of its embedment in Jewish tradition, since Protestant historicalcritical research on the Hebrew Bible sought to reconstruct a Biblical “Urtext” and was not very much interested in Masorah Studies as part of the “Niedere Kritik” (“Textkritik”). This development led to the result that Masorah studies by the representatives of the Wissenschaft des Judentums could not develop within the context of the academic Bible studies at the universities. Thus, the works of Salomon Frensdorff, Benjamin Wolf Heidenheim, or Seligmann Isaak Baer were neglected and were only recently rediscovered.

Abstract

Although the study of the Hebrew Bible never formed the center of formal Jewish education, it had always been part of it. In the Middle Ages, Masoretic Bibles as well as Masoretic compilations were studied and introduced in Jewish Medieval commentaries under a variety of names. Jewish commentators dealt differently with Masoretic notes. Whereas some of them made use of the Masorah in order to support rabbinic traditions that seemed to be tied to the biblical text only loosely, others dealt with the Masorah in the way modern scholarship would do, i. e., to take the Masoretic notes as a “fence around the written Torah”. Overall, the Masoretic Text was regarded as an essential component of the Bible although it was considered an offspring of later Jewish tradition. Still in the 18th century, Moses Mendelssohn in his introduction to the translation of the Pentateuch (1782) had argued that the oral tradition of the Masoretic text had served as a guarantor for the text’s purity, and had safeguarded the text from any later corruption. In contrast, the Protestant Bible scholar J. G. Eichhorn had argued that especially the oral transmission of the biblical text was the source of its corruption, and critical scholarship was obliged to emend the corrupt text. At the end of the 18th century at the latest, the Masoretic hyper-text was deprived of its embedment in Jewish tradition, since Protestant historicalcritical research on the Hebrew Bible sought to reconstruct a Biblical “Urtext” and was not very much interested in Masorah Studies as part of the “Niedere Kritik” (“Textkritik”). This development led to the result that Masorah studies by the representatives of the Wissenschaft des Judentums could not develop within the context of the academic Bible studies at the universities. Thus, the works of Salomon Frensdorff, Benjamin Wolf Heidenheim, or Seligmann Isaak Baer were neglected and were only recently rediscovered.

Downloaded on 6.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110551631-010/pdf
Scroll to top button