Bernard M.

Levinson, A More Perfect Torah: At the Intersection of Philology and Hermeneutics in Deuteronomy and the Temple Scroll (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns), 2013.

Bernard Levinsons new volume which inaugurates a new series titled Critical Studies in the Hebrew Bible is a decidedly appropriate one. It is technically difficult (requiring of readers a considerable depth of knowledge) and intellectually challenging. It is comprised of two major parts- actually two separate essays: Part One- Revelation Regained: The Hermeneutics of and in the Temple Scroll which was written not only be Levinson but also by Molly Zahn and it was first published several years previously elsewhere. And Part Two- Reception History as a Window into Composition History: Deuteronomys Law of Vows. Both essays are meticulously and carefully written in the highest critical spirit and with the latest cutting edge methodology. The volume also contains an Afterword in which Levinson interacts with more recent scholarship on The Hermeneutics of and in the Temple Scroll especially with the work of Simone Paganini. Indeed, the Afterword should actually, in my view, be read as soon as readers complete Part One. It clarifies much and also updates that segment of the volume. It (the work at hand) concludes with a number of appendices (3 of them to be precise), a bibliography, and indices of authors, Scripture, ancient sources, and subjects, and it is bespeckled throughout with numerous figures and tables. It is, let me be clear, a demanding book to read. Those who lack Hebrew will simply be lost as the technical nature of the topics discussed absolutely requires a decent familiarity with that ancient language. But it rewards those who are interested and determined. Levinson writes of it

Part One is entitled Revelation Regained: The Hermeneutics of and in the Temple Scroll. Co-written with Molly M. Zahn just over a decade ago, it examines the frequent replacement of conditional and in the Temple Scroll and argues that a new conceptual model is necessary to explain the phenomenon accurately (p. xi). Levinson accomplishes his goal with a clarity and specificity that is in sum nearly unassailable. Part Two is written solely, again, by Levinson and closely examines the syntax and content of the law of vows in Deut 23:2224 (p. xii). Here too Levinson states his case clearly, carefully, and brilliantly. Why do these studies matter? I think that our author is right when he opines the history of the reception and interpretation of the Bible in the Second Temple period offers a window into the compositional history of the biblical text. Analysis of the exegetical reworking of the Bible in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in rabbinic literature can provide a valuable critical tool for a more acute understanding of the process of composition of the biblical text (p. xiii). And then By beginning with the Temple Scroll and then working back to the more detailed study of the biblical text (in part 2), I sought to implement the books larger intellectual project: to show the relevance of reception history for understanding composition history (p. xiii). Mission accomplished. But take note and be careful, Levinsons argument is so persuasive and his critical skills so sharpened by use that readers may find themselves bewitched into accepting without argument or question the conclusions he proffers. Every writer deserves a sympathetic hearing (unless they are beset by and ensconced in the wretched dilettantism so widespread these days on the internet); but every scholar also deserves a critical distance no matter how brilliant. Only by maintaining that but what if stance will readers honestly engage in and interact with other scholars. That said, it is so very tempting to surrender and suggest that Levinson has uttered the final word on the subject. The book is just that good.

Students of the Hebrew Bible who have sufficient mastery of the language are urged to take the time necessary to engage Levinsons tome.

Jim West Quartz Hill School of Theology