scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Esther Glickler Chazon

Bio: Esther Glickler Chazon is an academic researcher from Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The author has contributed to research in topics: Biblical studies & Dead Sea Scrolls. The author has an hindex of 1, co-authored 3 publications receiving 36 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The questions relating to women at Qumran and attitudes of the community toward them regardless of their presence or absence at the site have drawn considerable interest in the last few years and for good reasons as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The questions relating to women at Qumran-whether they were in attendance there and the attitudes of the community toward them regardless of their presence or absence at the site-have drawn considerable interest in the last few years and for good reasons.' Some of the skeletal remains from excavations in the Qumran cemeteries recently resurfaced and stimulated a flurry of new analyses.2 Also on the archaeological front, de Vaux's notes are gradually coming to light, permitting researchers to determine from the fuller archaeological record the evidence for and against the presence of women there.3 And at nearly the same time, DJD editions of some of the halakhic and sapiential scrolls containing substantial passages related to women

1 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors examines the ways in which a single liturgical text, the Words of the Luminaries, would be read by two diachronically and ideologically different audiences: the implied audience of the pre-Qumranic author and the actual audience at Qumran, which preserved this text.
Abstract: This article examines the ways in which a single liturgical text, the Words of the Luminaries , would be read by two diachronically and ideologically different audiences: the implied audience of the pre-Qumranic author and the actual audience of the Yaḥad community at Qumran, which preserved this text. The text’s first person plural rhetorical stance invites the implied audience to identify with its “we, Israel” voice and with the fundamental beliefs, ideas, and values encoded in the “we” discourse. These major ideological themes conjoined with the pan-Israelite rhetorical stance convey messages about identity and ideology that are dissonant with the Yaḥad ’s deterministic, dualistic ideology and sectarian identity as the elect “Congregation of God.” Nonetheless, the common past, foundational narratives, and shared values, especially regarding the Torah, would facilitate the Yaḥad ’s reception of this originally non-Qumranic text and enable it to be read through the lens of the Yaḥad ’s sectarian identity.

Cited by
More filters
Book ChapterDOI
01 Dec 1999
TL;DR: GNOTICISM Jewish elements in gnosticism: the problem defined It should be obvious even from a cursory reading of Gnostic literature that there are Jewish elements.
Abstract: GNOTICISM Jewish elements in gnosticism: the problem defined It should be obvious even from a cursory reading of Gnostic literature that there are Jewish elements in Gnosticism. These elements are of many different kinds, and may be classified in many different ways, but for our present purposes it will be sufficient to distinguish two broad categories – biblical and non-biblical. To the first category belong the quotations from, or allusions to, the Old Testament in the Gnostic texts. (For convenience we may include here also much Gnostic exegesis of the Old Testament.) Into the second category may be put all those Gnostic ideas, motifs, literary genres, technical terms and formulae which have been paralleled more or less convincingly in post-biblical Jewish literature. It is important to realize that the significance of an element will vary according to the category into which it falls. The Jewishness of elements in category one is not, in the last analysis, open to question. We may speculate on how Old Testament materials found their way into Gnosticism (whether through Christianity, pre-Christian Jewish Gnosticism, or by direct borrowing from Judaism), but that they are Jewish can hardly be disputed. The Jewishness of elements in category two, on the other hand, is often problematic. We are dealing here in the first instance with parallelism, and that creates a host of problems. We must establish that the parallelism we perceive is real and significant – in itself no small task. Then we must face the question of origins: who has borrowed from whom? There is a tendency for scholars to assume that in cases of parallelism Gnosticism is indebted to Judaism.

49 citations

Dissertation
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this paper, a context-sensitive study of key epistemological commitments and concerns presented in two series of exegetical writings is presented, and the major conclusion advanced in this thesis is that two theological epistemologies can be detected among these writings.
Abstract: This thesis is a context-sensitive study of key epistemological commitments and concerns presented in Philo’s two series of exegetical writings. The major conclusion advanced in this thesis is that two theological epistemologies, distinct yet related, can be detected among these writings. The first epistemology is specific to the Allegorical Commentary. The second epistemology is specific to the ‘Exposition of the Law.’ The epistemology of the Allegorical Commentary reflects a threefold conviction: the sovereignty of God, the creaturely contingency of the human mind and its inescapable limitations. In conversation with key epistemological notions of his day, Philo develops this threefold conviction in exegetical discourses that are grounded in Pentateuchal texts portraying the God of Moses as both possessing epistemic authority and aiding the aspiring mind to gain purification and perfection in the knowledge of God. Guided by this threefold conviction, Philo enlists key metaphors of his day – initiation into divine mysteries and divine inspiration, among others –in order to capture something of the essence of Moses’ twofold way of ascending to the divine, an approach which requires at times the enhancement of human reason and at other times the eviction of human reason. The epistemology of the ‘Exposition’ reflects Philo’s understanding of the Pentateuch as a perfect whole partitioned into three distinct yet inseverable parts. Philo’s knowledge discourses in the ‘creation’ part of the ‘Exposition’ reflect two primary movements of thought. The first is heavily invested with a Platonic reading of Genesis 1.27 while the second invests Genesis 2.7 with a mixture of Platonic and Stoic notions of human transformation and well-being. Philo’s discourses in the ‘patriarchs’ segment reflect an interest in portraying the three great patriarchs as exemplars of the virtues of instruction (Abraham), nature (Isaac), and practice (Jacob) which featured prominently in Greek models of education. In the ‘Moses’ segment of the ‘Exposition,’ many of Philo’s discourses on knowledge are marked by an interest in presenting Moses as the ideal king, lawgiver, prophet and priest who surpasses Plato’s paradigm of the philosopher-king. In keeping with this view, Philo insists that the written laws of Moses represent the perfect counterpart to the unwritten law of nature. The life and laws of Moses serve as the paradigm for Philo to understand his own experiences of noetic ascent and exhort readers to cultivate similar aspirational notions and practices.

44 citations

Book ChapterDOI
09 Dec 1999

40 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Dec 1999

31 citations