On Leaven

I wrote:

If you argue that "earth" doesn't exactly correspond to "bread" I call your attention to another section in Irenaeus' Against the False Heresies which reads:

Also the parable of the leaven which the woman is described as having hid in three measures of meal, they declare to make manifest the three classes. For, according to their teaching, the woman represented Sophia; the three measures of meal, the three kinds of men-spiritual, animal, and material; while the leaven denoted the Saviour Himself. Paul, too, very plainly set forth the material, animal, and spiritual, saying in one place, "As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; " [emphasis mine] and in another place, "But the animal man receiveth not the things of the Spirit; " and again: "He that is spiritual judgeth all things." And this, "The animal man receiveth not the things of the Spirit," they affirm to have been spoken concerning the Demiurge, who, as being animal, knew neither his mother who was spiritual, nor her seed, nor the Aeons in the Pleroma. And that the Saviour received first-fruits of those whom He was to save, Paul declared when he said, "And if the first-fruits be holy, the lump is also holy," teaching that the expression "first-fruits" denoted that which is spiritual, but that "the lump" meant us, that is, the animal Church, the lump of which they say He assumed, and blended it with Himself, inasmuch as He is "the leaven."

Boid responds:

The short answer is that I have read what you have sent and it seems to me not to be forced. Before going further I have to decide whether your proposed solution to the corruption in the transcription of the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase is right. Your suggestion that a Hebrew or Aramaic word meaning “leaven” lurks behind the nonsense before us is very convincing. It would certainly give a clearer meaning to the phrase “the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees”.

Here are some bits of information on reading corrupt words in a text, specially if they are words the in a language not known to the scribe. (a) The point of division between words can shift. (b) This means that letters can be re-arranged across neighbouring words, not just within a word. (c) There is a tendency to re-order letters or change letters to make words already known, even if the resulting words don’t fit, or the scribe doesn’t know whether they fit or not. “Assur” is the common transcription of אשור Assyria in Greek and Latin texts of this time, so this combination of letters in this order has a strong chance of not being original. (d) There is a tendency to re-arrange letters so as to make something that seems pronounceable. (e) Re-ordering of letters is usually only slight, because a mistake in copying will only make a slight change and scribes are generally too cautious to go far from what is before them. (f) Greek and Latin letters can easily be misread if not completely clear. You can see this for yourself when you have to write a word that is not easily guessed onto a form, and you have to print very carefully. Thus “Woolloomooloo” or “Crow’s Nest” or “Leichhardt” (all in Sydney) can be scrawled, but “Medicine Hat” would have to be printed carefully. In Greek uncials, there can be interchange of ΑΔΛ or ΟΟΘ or CεΟ or ΜΝ or ΝΕ or ΕΓΤ (Notice the shapes of the sigma (looking like a Roman C), omega (the same as omicron but with a line underneath) and epsilon. In Roman uncials interchange of EF or FT can occur. In lower-case cursive there are other possibilities. Also, if there are more than two similar letters near each other, one can drop out. Also, a sequence of two letters the same as each other can be reduced to one, even across word boundaries, as in ΜΑΡΙΑΜΜΑΓΔΑΛΗΝΗ. (f) Always bear in mind how the original Hebrew or Aramaic words could have been transcribed, i.e. learn the transcription system in use at the time. What is a sheva in the Masoretic system is transcribed as “a” in Greek and Roman letters at this time, so שאר meaning “leaven” in Hebrew would come out as SAOR in Roman letters and CAOP in Greek letters. And of course there is the difficulty in transcribing the letter shin so as to distinguish its sound from that of samech. Bear in mind as well that the pronunciation used by the Masoretes was never the only pronunciation. You have seen this with the name Mariam. [The forms of names in English usually agree with the pronunciation assumed by the LXX and then by the Vulgate. Thus Masoretic Rivka, but English Rebecca, Vulgate Rebecca = LXX Rebekka, Samaritan Hebrew Rebeka. (The LXX tends to agree with the Samaritan system)]. (g) You always know you’re right when your guess fits all these restrictions AND ILLUMINATES THE MEANING OF THE PARAGRAPH, specially if it expresses A CONCEPT ALREADY KNOWN TO BE IMPORTANT, or better still, A FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT or a CONCEPT USED IN THE SELF-DEFINITION OF A MOVEMENT.

Note: When I typed NE in the list of commonly confused Greek letters, that should have been NH. Add ΠΛ to the list.

I hope this helps. Even though my time’s limited just now, I can still answer specific questions, specially if I don’t need to look up more than a few details.