These annotations to The Odes of Solomon: The Nuhra Version (2021) detail textual variants and explain our translation choices.

The Odes of Solomon: The Nuhra Version (2021) Annotations Copyright © 2021 Samuel Zinner. Please cite as: Samuel Zinner, The Odes of Solomon: The Nuhra Version (2021) Annotations (Aulla, Italy). Online: https://www.nuhra.net/annotations-2021/ 

The Odes of Solomon:
The Nuhra Version (2021)
Annotations

 By Samuel Zinner
Edited by Mark M. Mattison

 
Note on the Translation Titles

Samuel Zinner has proposed that the Odes of Solomon were intentionally organized into three sets of fourteen, the numerical value of the Hebrew name “David” (d=4 + w=6 + d=4 = 14), according to the same pattern of Jesus’ genealogy in Matthew: “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David . . . So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations.” (Matt. 1:1, 17, RSV) Thus it should come as no surprise that this collection of odes was attributed to Solomon, the biological son of David.

If we divide the forty-two odes into three units or “Books,” that is, Odes 1-14, Odes 15-28, and Odes 29-42, an intriguing pattern emerges. We notice that the penultimate odes of both Book I and Book II are strikingly brief (Ode 13 has only four verses; Ode 27 has only three). At first glance, this pattern does not seem to hold for Book III, given that its penultimate ode (Ode 41) has sixteen verses. However, the proposed threefold division for the Odes of Solomon could explain the strangeness of Ode 42 being composed of what virtually all scholars agree look like two separate odes, namely, verses 1-2 and verses 3-20. Moreover, verses 1-2 are famously but a variation of Ode 27, Book II’s penultimate ode. So in a subtle or even clever way, Ode 42:1-2 could actually be intended to function as Book III’s penultimate ode. The reason it was combined with the next “ode,” that is, Ode 42:3-20, would have been to formally limit the text to a total of forty-two odes in order to maintain an allusion to the Davidic formula 14 x 3 = 42. Ode 42:15 even contains an echo of the traditional formula, “son of David, have mercy on me/us” (Mark 10:47; Matt 20:30), although, congruent with Mark 12:35-37, the odist changes the title to “son of God.”  

Accordingly, The Odes of Solomon: The Nuhra Version (2021) divides the text into three Books, each with appropriate brief titles that reflect some of the more striking motifs of each unit.

Lastly, following the precedent of some earlier translations, The Nuhra Version (2021) adds titles to each of the forty-two odes. Earlier translators created titles by choosing a favorite phrase or idea in each ode. By contrast, Zinner determined the total word count for each ode, and then halved the respective numbers in order to locate the mathematical middle of each of ode. Whatever statement was found in the mathematical middle of each ode was then used for their respective titles. In this way, the titles have an objective quality by literally reflecting each ode’s central idea. The sole exception is the fragmentary Ode 3, whose middle cannot be determined.

Abbreviations

1QM: War Scroll from Qumran, Cave 1 (Dead Sea Scrolls)
1QS: Rule of the Community from Qumran, Cave 1 (Dead Sea Scrolls)
4Q434: Barkhi Nafshi from Qumran, Cave 4 (Dead Sea Scrolls)
Apos. Con.: Apostolic Constitutions
BT: Babylonian Talmud
C: Coptic
Ca.: Circa
Cf.: Compare
Ch.: Chapter
Chs.: Chapters
E: Ethiopic
e.g.: for example
fem.: feminine
G: Greek
H: Hebrew
Ḥag.: Ḥaggiga (BT tractate)
i.e.: that is
JPS 1917: The Jewish Publication Society TANAKH 1917
LXX: The Septuagint (3rd to 1st Century BCE Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible)
masc.: masculine
Ms H: Codex Harris (Rylands Cod. Syr. 9)
Ms N: Codex Nitriensis (BM Add. 14538)
n.: Note
NETS: New English Translation of the Septuagint
NRSV: New Revised Standard Version of the Bible
NT: New Testament
OS Sin: Old Syriac Sinaiticus
P. Bodmer: Papyrus Bodmer
RSV: Revised Standard Version of the Bible
S: Syriac
Šabb.: Šabbat (BT tractate)
SyrP: Peshiṭta (Syriac translation of the Bible)
Tg. Pss.: Targum Psalms
v.: verse
vv.: verses

Our translation tends toward being literal while not excluding idiom; explanatory glosses in parentheses throughout facilitate understanding of the text. On the basis of Steiner 2000, Zinner has rendered the Syriac conjunctive waw consistently as “and,” except in a few instances where English grammar demands otherwise; in such cases “even” is used. As in the NRSV, divine pronouns are in lower case (e.g., “he,” “his,” “you,” etc.). Following the precedent of the Jewish Publication Society TANAKH Translation (1985) we have also adopted the following conventions for capitalization: When referring to God, we capitalize “Father”; mentions of the divine spirit are in lower case, e.g., in phrases such as “spirit of the Lord” and “holy spirit”; lower case is used for “messiah” and/or “anointed one”; mentions of a divine “son” are also in lower case. Syriac ṭybwtˀ corresponds semantically to Hebrew ḥsd, which the 1985 JPS TANAKH renders as “steadfast love,” and Zinner has adopted this for translating the Syriac ṭybwtˀ. Following the editorial models of van der Lugt’s trilogy Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry (2005; 2010; 2013) and Lattke 1980, transliteration of the Syriac generally includes the twenty-two consonants; vowels are not generally rendered since they can be disputed in some instances. Lower case “odist” refers to the Odes of Solomon’s composer; upper case “Odist” refers to the literary figure who speaks in the first-person in the text. Abbreviations of ancient Jewish and Christian texts and of journal titles follow The SBL Handbook of Style.

The first two odes have not been preserved in Syriac; however, Ode 1 is quoted in the fourth-century Coptic manuscript of the Pistis Sophia.

1:1a “wreath.” Harris 1909, rev. ed. 1911, Harris and Mingana 1920, and Charlesworth 1983 translate “crown.” Vleugels and Webber 2016 translate “garland,” pointing out that “crown” could give the modern reader the mistaken notion of a metal head-piece encrusted with jewels instead of a head-piece made of twigs. The Pistis Sophia ch. 59 quotations of Ode 1a and Ode 5:12a are similar but not identical. C Ode 1:1a reads pjoeis hijn taape nthe nouklom, “The Lord is upon my head like a wreath,” while C Ode 5:12a reads pjoeis o´ nouklom etaape, “The Lord has been a wreath for my head.” 

1:1b The Pistis Sophia ch. 59 quotations of Ode 1:1b and Ode 5:12b are identical: auō ntinarpəfbol an. The notable differences between C Ode 1:1a and C Ode 5:12a are not congruent with the hypothesis that Pistis Sophia’s author was confusing the two verses, which is incompatible with the scribe having to copy Odes 1 and 5 from different pages of a codex (or scroll). Instead, the scribe was deliberately associating the two passages because of their marked similarity. On this basis we can be confident that the Coptic scribe’s Greek Vorlage had an identical reading for Ode 1:1b and Ode 5:12b, which in turn suggests the Syriac text read the same in Ode 1:1b and Ode 5:12b. We can therefore posit that Ode 1:1b in Syriac read as in Ode 5:12b wlˀ ˀttzyˁ, “and I will not be moved/shaken” or “removed.” In the Ct stem the verb zwˁ includes the meanings “to depart,” “to be removed.” Cf. the translation of C Ode 1:1b in Worrell 1911, 34, “and I shall not depart from Him.” It is not clear whether the Greek version had added the explanatory gloss “from him” (ap’ autou), which is absent in the Syriac, or if this was added by the Coptic translator. 

1:2,3 This imagery derives in a general way from Psalm 1, especially Ps 1:3 which describes the one who meditates on the Torah. Ps 1:3, “like a tree . . . whose leaf doth not wither” (JPS 1917), shapes Ode 1:3, “not like a dry wreath that blooms not.” Ps 1:3c, “and whose leaf doth not wither,” is, as van der Lugt 2013, 580 documents, the middle stich of Ps 1 (7+1+7 stichs). Because the middle stich of Ode 1 (4+1+4 stichs), which is v. 3, thematically and lexically imitates the middle stich of Ps 1, which is also v. 3 of that text, this suggests that Ode 1 may have imitated not only the imagery and language of Ps 1, but its stich numerical pattern as well. It is therefore likely that Pistis Sophia cites the entirety of Ode 1.

1:5b “healing.” Harris 1909, rev. ed. 1911, Harris and Mingana 1916-1920, Charlesworth 1983, and Lattke 2009 translate “salvation”; but see Worrell 1911 “healing.” In biblical idiom, fruits (like leaves) do not bring salvation, but health, healing, or life; cf. Ezek 47:12; Rev 22:2; Prov 11:30; and especially the Syrohexaplar on Sir 1:18: “The wreath of wisdom is the fear of the Lord, and therewith the Lord causes to sprout peace full of healing.”

Ode 2 has not survived in any manuscript. Samuel Zinner’s hypothesis that Ode 11:16c-16h and G 11:22b may originally have been a part of Ode 2 is based on several observations: First, the six stichs of v. 11:16c-h in the Greek text do not appear in the Syriac, but are evidently interpolated. As Reinink 1974, 65 explains pace Charlesworth, it is most unlikely that parablepsis could explain the omission of such a lengthy portion of text, and the six stichs “form a self-contained unit that can be easily removed from the context. . . .” Especially in the case of G 11:22b, interpolation is more likely than the possibility that it was original to the text but omitted by the Syriac, since this line actually disrupts the structure of 22a and c. (See the annotation on Ode 9:8b). On the other hand, the Letter of Barnabas and the G/E Apocalypse of Peter already attest some of these extra lines in the early second century (cf. Barn. 11:10 and the Apoc. Pet. 15ff. transfiguration narrative), and the language and imagery are consistent with the Odes as a whole. It therefore appears that these lines may be original to the Odes of Solomon, but intentionally misplaced in the Greek text of Ode 11. Since they’re not attested elsewhere in the Syriac, it seems plausible that they may have come from the text’s lost portions, that is, from Ode 1 or Ode 2, or from the lost beginning of Ode 3. The lines seem more akin to Ode 1 than to the extant portion of Ode 3. However, a plausible case can be made that Pistis Sophia cites the entirety of Ode 1. The most plausible placement for the seven extra Greek lines would therefore be in Ode 2. With respect to G Ode 11:22b and the emendation of a perplexing word usually read as drōstes to horōntes (“those who see”), see the annotation on Ode 11:22 below.

3:1 “[My limbs with light] / I am covering” or “putting on.” Since the beginning of Ode 3 is also missing, it’s impossible to know for certain what the Odist is “putting on.” Since 3:10 mentions “the spirit,” Barnes 1910 and Morrison 1980 opt for “the spirit of the Lord.” Since 4:6 reads “put on your grace,” Bruston 1912 suggests “grace.” While the Odes of Solomon mention various differing things that are “put on,” only “light” in Ode 21:3 occurs near a mention of limbs, the noun that follows Ode 3:1. In 3:2, the confused scribe first wrote “and my limbs,” then corrected it to “and his limbs.” If the first part of 3:1 had read “my limbs,” it is possible the scribe was accidentally repeating the term “my limbs” in 3:2.

3:2 “And his limbs are with <me>, / and to them I cling, / and he loves me.” As noted above, the scribe was confused when copying this verse, first writing “my limbs” but then changing it to “his limbs.” While the scribe correctly settled for “his limbs,” the rest of the verse indicates that confusion lingered. The statement “his limbs are with him” at best sounds like a tautology or pleonasm, but the lines that follow indicate the emendation “his limbs are with me” is required. The scene is one of the Odist hanging on in passionate love to the limbs of the divine body. The background is a metaphorical interpretation of Song of Songs passages such as Song 7:11, “I am my beloved’s, and his desire is toward me.”

3:5b “soul.” Although Syriac np̄eš/nap̄šā can denote a person in their entirety as a living being or to the center of emotions, it can also refer to the detachable soul or spirit in contrast to the body; see Steiner 2015.

3:7 “son.” Harris and Mingana 1920, 211 compared Ode 3 to the mystical verses of the Islamic poet Jalāl ad-Dīn Rūmī (1207-1273 CE). According to the jurist and Sufi Imām al-Ghazālī (ca. 1058-1111 CE), the use of the divine name “Father” can be theologically legitimate from an Islamic perspective if understood non-literally in the sense of “creator.” The same qualification might be extended to cover the use of “son of God” for Jesus if “son” is understood in the sense of “one near to God.” See Nasr 1972, 135, n. 14.

3:8a “For he who cleaves to him.” An allusion to Gen 2:24; Deut 10:20; 30:20.

4:1-3 The general thought here is paralleled in 2 Bar. 4:2-6; namely, the pre-existent celestial or archetypal Temple endures and cannot be destroyed, and this is used as a coping strategy for the loss of the earthly Temple. Cf. also 1QS III:15-17.

4:6a “your goodness.” Others translate “your grace.” The Syriac reads ṭybwtk. Although the lexica define ṭybwtˀ as “grace” or “kindness” and ṭbh/ṭbtˀ as “goodness,” the fact is that Syriac ṭybwtˀ also sometimes renders Hebrew ṭwb, “goodness,” as in Ps 23:6. This can explain the interchange in Ms N and Ms H between ṭybwtˀ and ṭbtˀ in Ode 29:2b. Because Ode 4:5 paraphrases Ps 84:11, and because of the double use of ṭwb in Hebrew Ps 84:11-12, it is arguably more likely that ṭybwtˀ in Ode 4:6 refers to goodness. In any case, we should not overlook that the semantic and theological/doctrinal fields of “goodness” and “grace” often overlap significantly.

4:9a “partnership (šwtpwtˀ) in intimate union.” The Syriac noun šwtpwtˀ can refer to business partnerships, but just as well to the intimate partnership of marriage, including to the act of sexual intercourse. To render šwtpwtˀ as “fellowship” here seems to reflect the influence of English NT translations that render the Greek equivalent koinōnia as “fellowship.” Currently, the English word “fellowship” is most likely to make one think of the social interaction involved in group religious study and singing rather than in the intimate union of the human with the divine. This ode’s language of spiritual intimacy couched in erotic terms is based on a spiritual reading of the Song of Songs.

4:13c “remove,” ttwp; Harris suggests the emendation ttw<b>, “turn,” “turn back.”  Reinink 1974, 65 suggests the emendation may be unnecessary if ttwp is the imperfect of ntp, in the sense of “remove.”

4:14b “from in the beginning.” The construction mn bryšyt, idiomatically rendered “from/at the creation,” also occurs in 6:4a; 7:14b; 23:2c, 3c; 24:8a; and 41:9b. The noun bryšyt, which is used in Aramaic and later Hebrew in the sense of “creation,” is an artificial construct derived from (Hebrew) Gen 1:1, where the first word is berešit, that is, the preposition b, “in” + the noun rešit, “beginning.” The hyperliteral rendering of “from in the beginning” for mn bryšyt is intended to hint at the artificial noun’s origins in Gen 1:1.

5:1-11 These verses are quoted in ch. 58 of the Coptic Pistis Sophia.

5:7a “<weak>”; S lˁwbynˀ, “tumors”; C atcom, “without power.” While the S reading is possible, it is unusual, and in light of the C reading it is therefore probable that S requires emendation. One could posit an original lˀ ˁwšnˀ, “without power,” given that ˁwšnˀ, “power,” “strength,” “hardness,” has the base notion of being hard, which could have facilitated a transition to the idea of tumors. Moreover, the C version reads com where S Ode 25:6 reads ˁwšnˀ. However, as Charles Häberl remarked in a private communication, ˁuḇyā compounded with lā could become “without hardness; infirm,” which could be a possible equivalent to atcom. Without revealing his reasoning or supplying any references, Grimme 1911, 8 considers S lˁwbynˀ equivalent to Hebrew lšwˀ, which he renders with German zunichte. Accepting Zinner’s emendation of S lˁwbynˀ as originally two words, lˁ+noun, and accepting Häberl’s suggestion of ˁwbyˀ, the line lˁ ˁwbyˀ thwˀ trˁythwn  lā ˁuḇyā can be rendered idiomatically into English as “Let their plan wax <weak>.” Grimme 1911, 8 posits the S originally read plural “plans” in agreement with C. Exegetes agree Ode 5 alludes to Ps 17:7 (see Lattke 2009, 67), but the nearby Ps 5:11 must be included, which has the Hebrew pl. ˁṣwtyhm; SyrP pl. mwlknyhwn; LXX diabouliōn autōn. On the other hand, sing. ˁṣt/ ˁṣwt occurs eleven times in the Psalter, and the pl. only twice. In the S text of the Odes, trˁytˀ, one of the odist’s favorite terms, never occurs in the pl. Worrell 1911, 35 reads ˁwbynˀ in Ode 5:7a as a sing. The similarly worded S Ode 5:8-9, which rephrases and develops v. 7, reflects Ps 33:10 more closely than C Ode 5:8-9.

5:12b “and I will not be removed (ˀttzyˁ).” The Ct stem of zwˁ includes the meanings “to be removed,” “to depart” (see the annotation on Ode 1:1b). “Not . . . removed” in Ode 5:12b anticipates “I will stand” (v. 13b) – that is, continue to exist/live, as well as “perish” (v. 14a) and “not die” (v. 14b). Just as in English, in Syriac the verb for “depart” can also suggest death.

5:12-15 These verses are not quoted in ch. 58 of the Coptic Pistis Sophia, but in the commentary section of the following ch. 59 – with interpolations. Specifically, in ch. 59 “light” is substituted for “Lord” and the text is slightly expanded, particularly in verses 12 and 14. The reconstruction presented here reflects the more original Syriac version of 5:12-15. See Worrell 1911, 36, n. 14. Soon after the Coptic citation of Ode 5:12-15, Ode 1:1-5 is cited.

6:7 Charlesworth 1983 translates: “And His praise He gave us on account of His name, / Our spirits praise His Holy Spirit.” This approach treats the l-prefix of lšmh in v. 7a prepositionally (l- =“on account of”) and the l-prefix of lrwḥh in v. 7b as the sign of an accusative. However, nothing stands in the way of consistently treating the l-prefix of both lšmh and lrwḥh prepositionally. We can paraphrase loosely as follows: “By means of his name, he (i.e., the Lord) has enabled us to praise him; by means of his holy spirit we praise (the Lord).” The prefix l- used prepositionally can mean not only “to,” but also “by, for, of, on account of, according to,” etc. (See R. Payne Smith 1901, 2:1866.) Arguably, the l- of lrwḥh in Ode 13:2b, the only other occurrence in this text of lrwḥh, has the same function: “and announce praises by his spirit.” In Ode 14:8a the harp of the holy spirit enables the Odist to praise the Lord, not to praise the holy spirit. The same thought recurs in Ode 16:5.

6:8-18 These verses are quoted in ch. 65 of the Coptic Pistis Sophia.

6:8-10 “It flooded (grp) everything, and it covered (wšḥq) and carried (wˀyty) the Temple” (v. 8b). The verb grp can mean either “to wash away” or “to flood” (cf. the noun grwpyˀ, “a flood”). Here the verb šwq, usually meaning “to grind,” “to pulverize,” is interpreted as “covered,” that is, “inundated”; see the entry on šwq in Shamun 2014: “transitive 1) to overcome / to overwhelm, to submerge / to oppress, to crush / to flood.” Here šḥq repeats and intensifies the imagery of grp. “Carried” could also be rendered “carried away,” but not “carried to” (Vleugels 2011). Ode 6:8b can be understood negatively, reflecting an Essene attitude toward the Temple (Vleugels 2011). The Pistis Sophia interprets Ode 6:8b as the Temple (identified metaphorically as Jesus) being bathed in the waves of the divine light of knowledge. The Coptic author has correctly recognized in Ode 6:8 an allusion to Isa 11:9, “for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea.” (Alternatively, the Temple being carried or carried away by flood waters might also involve the idea that the Temple is like Noah’s saving ark; see Wenham 2003, 44). Significantly, Ode 6:8-10 is reworked in Ode 7:13-14, where the metaphor for divine knowledge changes from water to a path of light. (Ode 38:18 varies the metaphor yet again, to that of the divine planting: “It struck deep and grew up and spread out, / and became full and large.”)

6:10: Instead of “and it fulfilled everything,” Charlesworth 1983 translates “and it filled everything.” However, wmlˀ in Ode 6:10, like šwmlyˀ in Ode 7:13c, more likely carries the meaning of “and it fulfilled/perfected” in the spiritual sense rather than “and it filled” in a physical sense.

6:17 “their coming,” mˀtytˀ, corresponding to Hebrew byˀt and Greek parousia. The Coptic version reads parhēsia, corresponding to Greek parrēsia, which becomes a loanword in Syriac, pārēsīā, parhēsīā, boldness/liberty of speech; confidence/courage, as well as in Hebrew, parēsia. Because the Greek loanword parrēsia is a favorite term of the Coptic Pistis Sophia author, there are strong grounds for suspecting an intentional alteration of the text from an original Coptic parhousia to parhēsia. The Syriac reading mˀtytˀ is supported by another observation. As the annotation on Ode 6:8, 10 documents, Ode 7 repeats and varies several elements of Ode 6. These repetitions include dmtyth (Ode 7:17a), a form of the same noun in Ode 6:17. Not only are both instances of this verb put in the 17th verse of each of these two odes, but the arrival of the humans made possible in Ode 6:17 is actually described in Ode 7:17-18.

7:1a “<love> over <infancy>.” Based on slight emendations proposed by Morrison 1980, 138.

7:2b “my path is good” (ˀwrḥy špyrˀ). The allusion is to drk . . . ṭwb in Ps 36:5 (SyrP ˀwrḥˀ . . . špyrˀ; LXX odō . . . agathē). Consequently, špyrˀ in Ode 7:2 is not to be rendered “excellent” (Harris and Mingana 1920) nor “beautiful” (Lattke 2009).

7:3a “for to me it is a help (mˁdrnˀ) because of the Lord (l-mryˀ).” mˁdrnˀ can mean either “helper” or “help,” and the latter is the correct rendering for 7:3a. The help refers back to the good path of 2b. The construction l-mryˀ simply means “due to the Lord,” or more poetically, “because of the Lord.” See Nöldeke § 247. Pace Brock 1975, 143; Joosten 1998; and Lattke 2009, 92, l-mryˀ in Ode 7:3a reflects a common Semitism, not a Greek Vorlage. (Zinner thanks Charles Häberl for his helpful discussion on this aspect of Ode 7:3a).

7:7 “<From>.” Conjectural restoration on the basis of Morrison 1980, 294. “Father.” See the annotation on Ode 3:7.

7:18a “those who see.” Ode 7:17-19 reworks Ps 68:25-27. Consequently, the noun ḥzyˀ in Ode 7:18a, which sometimes functions as the technical term “seers,” here simply means “witnesses,” or in more poetic language, “those who see.” The parallelism of verses 17-19 and their basis in Ps 68:25-27 indicate that those who sing and those who see are not distinct, but form a single group. The “coming of the Lord” in Ode 7:18a rephrases the “goings” or “paths” of God in Ps 68:25, which according to Tg. Pss. are the paths of God on the water of the Red Sea, which “the house of Israel has seen” (ḥmwn; SyrP ḥzw). See the annotation on Ode 11:22b, “those who <see> your waters.”

7:10b “his offering,” not “his being.” The offering or sacrifice is that of God’s condescension mentioned earlier in v. 7:3c, which refers to God’s gracious act of creating humans in the divine image (Gen 1:26-28) so that they might be capable of knowing God.

8:20a “I willed and formed” could also be rendered “I willed to form”; see Drijvers 1980, 342.

8:22a “seek much and abide”; see Reinink 1974, 65-66, referring to Nöldeke § 337 and § 335: “weasgaw belongs to beˁaw: ‘pray much’,” responding to Charlesworth’s note: “However, the copulative Waw prefixed to the following verb signifies that we have three separate verbs.” The verb bˁw can also mean “seek,” “study” (see annotation on Ode 17:12). Prayer is not the only mode of seeking.

9:8b This stich is a beatitude that artfully intervenes between a two-part statement in v. 8a and v. 9a. The beatitude’s theme agrees with both what precedes and follows it. This case is therefore not comparable to the eulogy in G 11:22b. The eulogy introduces a theme discordant to 22a and c that disrupts the verse structurally.

10:5a “And the peoples who had been scattered were gathered together.” Here “the peoples” are not the Gentiles, but the ten northern tribes of Israel in the Diaspora. This is supported by 10:6c, “and they became my people forever and ever,” an allusion to Hos 1:9-2:1, where the ten tribes are promised that their status as “not my people” will be reversed. Cf. John 11:52, which also refers to the gathering of the ten tribes, “and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad” (RSV). The phrase “the children of God” is derived here from Hos 2:1.

10:5b “and I was not defiled by their sins against me.” Literally, “and I was not defiled by my sins.” Emerton 1984 is one of the rare scholars who renders this stich literally, resisting emendations. All suggested emendations from Harris 1909 to Lattke 2009 may likewise be disregarded. However, the literal text is translated here in a paraphrasing way on the basis of an analogy in Ode 28:10, 11: “And my unrighteousness became my salvation; / and I was their abomination. / Because there was no envy in me.” The term “my unrighteousness” can also be rendered “my injustice” or “my oppression,” which refers not to acts of unrighteousness or injustice the messiah commits, but to acts that are committed against him. Similarly, in Ode 10:5b, when the messiah is made to say “my sins,” this refers to the sins the peoples imputed to him. In Ode 28:10, “my injustice” (= “the injustice of others done against me”) is the analogy that clarifies “my sins” in Ode 10:5.

10:6b “And they lived by my halakhah and were redeemed.” On the rendering halakhah, see the annotation on Ode 17:8a.

11:1-24 is also preserved in the Bodmer “Composite” codex, a third- or fourth-century Greek manuscript.

11:10a See Reinink 1974, 66, who points out in criticism of Charlesworth’s translation “And I rejected the folly cast upon the earth” that “šebqêt is to be correlated with šadyâ, otherwise we would expect dešadyâ.”

11:16c-h, which is not present in the Syriac, appears to be an interpolation in the Greek version of Ode 11. On Zinner’s hypothesis that these lines are from the lost Ode 2, see the annotation on Ode 2.

11:16d Greek “self-grown was their wreath.” Lattke 2009 translates “and their crown was grown naturally.” The term for “self-grown” is derived from Isa 37:30; see Carmignac 1961, 90.

11:22a Whereas the Syriac reads “everything became like your remnant,” the Greek reads “everything is according to your will.” Both tropes are amply attested in Semitic texts. If thelēma (“will”) was meant as a pun on leimma (“remnant”), the variants may have been intentional. In ancient texts, variations between original and translated manuscripts were normal. Therefore, if the author was bilingual, composing the first version in Syriac and then rendering it into Greek, both readings could be equally valid, with no need to emend one to conform to the other.

11:22b “Blessed are <those who see> your waters.” This stich, not found in the Syriac, likely may originally have followed 11:16c-h (on which see the annotation on Ode 2). The perplexing word in this stich, usually read as drōstes, has been emended in a number of ways by scholars. It appears that the scribe tried to modify for clarity the letter that most presume to be a delta. However, this letter does not resemble any of the manuscript’s deltas. It does resemble many of the scribe’s cursive alphas, including that of hudatōn in the same stich. The penultimate alpha in aiōnias in 11:24 has been secondarily modified for clarity in a way similar to the presumed delta in 11:22b. Occasionally, the scribe’s omicrons and alphas look virtually identical; e.g., in the same ms, see the scribe’s omicron in the word adelphos in Jude 1:1 (for image, see the last page of The Greek Ode of Solomon Illustrated Greek-English Interlinear at https://www.nuhra.net/manuscripts). If the disputed letter in 11:22b originally had been an omicron, it would have read orōstes, a perplexing word that is in fact found elsewhere in the Bodmer “Composite” codex. Fortunately, it is clear what it was intended to mean in that instance. That other instance is 1 Pet 1:8 in P. Bodmer 8, which uses the odd form orōstes for horōntes, “seeing” (see the image at https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Pap.Bodmer.VIII). Adopting this reading in Ode 11:22b, the stich could be reconstructed as “Blessed are those who see your waters” (cf. Ode 7:18a and Ode 30:6-7). See the annotation on Ode 7:18a.
     
11:23a-b “For the place of your paradise has plentiful room, / and nothing lies fallow in it.” Cf. 2 En. 8:8: “And here [in paradise] there is no unfruitful tree, and every place is blessed” (R. H. Charles translation).

12:1a “utterances.” The Ms (H) has ptgmˀ in the plural. See Morrison 1980, 136 for reasons to retain the plural points, pace Harris and Mingana 1920, 273 and Newbold 1911, 185.

12:3a “And he caused his (or: truth’s) knowledge to abound in me.” The subject in 12:3a is truth, not the divine word/speech. See Morrison 1980, 136 and Reinink 1974, 66.

12:4 Much of Ode 12 is inspired by the Torah-centered Psalms 19 and 119. Ode 12:4 (like Ode 19:10-11) structurally mimics Ps 19:8-10. One example is Ode 12:4e “and the preachers,” wmsbrnˀ, which is a reflex of sbrthwn, a reading later to be preserved in SyrP Ps 19:5.

12:6b “and it knows neither its descent nor its course”; see Reinink 1974, 66, which points out that v. 6b simply rephrases v. 6a. Emending the active “knows” (ydˁ) to the passive “is known” (ydyˁ) is unwarranted.

12:12a “bar nasha.” Because of ongoing scholarly debate about how Syriac/Aramaic bar naša should be translated, the phrase has been transliterated both here and in Ode 36:3. The form of the phrase br ˀnšˀ does not match the spelling of the messianic title Son of Humanity (cf. NRSV Son of man) found in SyrP Dan 7:13, nor in the OS or SyrP gospels. However, it does match the form in SyrP Ezek 1:26, where it is used of the celestial human-like figure seated on the divine merkabah (chariot) throne. This Ezek 1:26 figure is in fact the inspiration for the later Son of Humanity figure in both Daniel 7 and 1 Enoch’s Parables, two texts that have informed the gospels’ Son of Humanity figure. Among recent translations of Ode 12:12a, Vleugels and Webber 2016 is to be preferred: “For the tabernacle of the message is the Son of Man.” Pace Charlesworth, Lattke, et al., in Ode 12:12a br ˀnšˀ is no more a collective singular than is the same phrase in Ode 36:3b, where it stands parallel to the title “son of God.” See annotation on Ode 36:3b.

12:13 “Blessed are they who by means of it have understood everything, / and have known the Lord in his truth.” Cf. 2 En. 42:14 (Recension A): “Blessed is he who understands all the Lord’s works, and who through his works knows the creator/artisan” (Zinner’s translation from the Slavonic text in Vaillant 1952, 44).

13:1b “Open the eyes (ptḥw ˁynˀ) and see them in him.” The Syriac text is unusual in that ˁynˀ, “eyes,” lacks a pronominal suffix; one would normally expect “your eyes.” Lattke 2009, 192-193 sees evidence for a Greek Vorlage, pointing out that the construction is not Semitic. However, if the odist was bilingual, this could be a case of Greek interference. Alternatively, keeping in mind that poetry in any culture can push the limits of language, it may be that the odist was simply being deliberately enigmatic. In Ephrem De virginitate 31:12, which Harris and Mingana 1920, 19-20 refer to as dependent on Ode 13, we read qnw ˁynˀ nsytˀ, “they acquired a hidden eye.” Cf. Ode 15:3a, “By him I acquired (qnyt) eyes.”

13:2b “And declare praises on account of his spirit!” This is generally translated “And declare praises to his spirit,” but the prepositional prefix l- in lrwḥh can mean not only “to,” but also “by, for, of, on account of, according to,” etc. See R. Payne Smith 1901, 2:1866. See annotation on Ode 6:7b.

13:3a The Ms reads ṣydtˀ, “huntress,” likely a corruption of ṣdydˀ, “eyeshadow.” Of all suggested emendations, ṣdydˀ is the only one that not only coheres with v. 3a, but which also connects directly to the central theme of “eyes” in v. 1. Moreover, ṣdydˀ is an Enochic term, which is congruent with the allusions to Enochic themes in the nearby Ode 11:23 and Ode 12:12-13. See 1 En. 8:1, which traces the origin of eyeshadow to the teaching of Azazel, the leader of the fallen angels, the “sons of God” who in Gen 6:1-4 descended to earth to mate with human women who subsequently gave birth to giants, whose disembodied spirits became later tradition’s evil spirits or demons. Harris and Mingana 1920, 19-20 reference Ephrem De virginitate 31:12 as dependent on Ode 13. Ephrem here reworks Ode 13:3-4 as: “their blemishes they have wiped away by/in it [the mirror], and their ornamentations (ṣbtyhwn) have become beautiful by/in it.” The noun ṣbtˀ can also mean “cosmetics.” See Sokoloff 1273b for the corrupted form ṣbdˀ for ṣbtˀ (ṣb{d}<t>ˀ). It is likely that Ephrem’s ṣbtˀ was suggested by the disputed word in Ode 13:3a, cleverly transvalued in a positive sense. It is even possible that ṣbtˀ in the sense of “cosmetics” was the original reading behind the corrupted ṣydtˀ in Ode 13:3a.

14:5-6 Instead of “let me/let it,” the verbs could be read as “I will/it will.”

14:5b-6a “and because of your name (mtl šmk) let me be saved from evil (byšˀ). And your repose.” Verse 5b is not an allusion to the “Our Father,” but a compression of mtl šmk in Ps 23:3 (SyrP), “because of your name,” and byštˀ, “evil,” in Ps 23:4 (see SyrP). “Repose” (nyḥwtˀ) in Ode 14:6a then makes sense as a reflex of “waters of repose (nyḥˀ),” as in SyrP Ps 23:2b.

15:1-2 Here the sun is personified, as in Ps 19:4. Ode 15 reworks Ode 11, but at half the length.

15:10b “became known.” Reinink 1974, 67 points out that the statement is ethpe., not ettaph., as Charlesworth (1973) mistakenly thought.

17:4a “With her hands she cut off my bonds.” The sudden shift to the feminine pronoun is enigmatic, but so is much of the text of the Odes of Solomon. The suspicion of missing or corrupted text should not be pressed without compelling argumentation or evidence.

17:7c Ms H: “he glorified me”; Ms N: “he was glorified.”

17:8a “halakhot.” Harris 1909 translates “precepts,” which agrees with Satzungen, “statutes,” in Flemming and Harnack 1910, 47, who supply the footnote: “‘The way of his statutes’: the Mosaic law cannot be meant, but rather specific rulings [based thereon].” The rendering “precepts” for hlaktā or hellaktā, literally “walking,” which can also mean “manner of walking,” would be equivalent to halakhic precepts, the term halakha being derived from the Hebrew halakh, “to walk.” According to R. Payne Smith 1879, 1:1015, hlaktā/hellaktā in a metaphorical sense means “custom” (mores), which also belongs to the semantic field of Syriac nāmōs/nāmōsā, the Greek loanword used in the Peshiṭta for torah. An allusion to precepts in 17:8a in the context of the descent to sheol is congruent with another descent passage in Ode 22:2b, which in the Coptic reads “(he) also taught <me> about them.” Further support is found later in Ode 17:12, in the same descent to sheol context as in 17:8a. See the annotation on 17:12.

17:11a Ms H: “my prisoners”; Ms N: “the prisoners.”

17:12 “And I gave my knowledge without envy (dlˀ ḥsm), / and I gave my study (or “learning,” wbˁwty) through my love.” While it is clear that “without envy” (dlˀ ḥsm) in v. 12a stands in poetic and semantic parallelism to “with love” (bḥwbˀ) in v. 12b, the usual renderings of wbˁwty in v. 12b offer nothing semantically similar to “knowledge,” its poetic parallel in v. 12a. Lattke translates “consolation,” Charlesworth “resurrection,” and Harris and Mingana “prayer.” The key is to recognize that the verb bˁy  can render Hebrew drš in its late sense of to study, as in Ps 111:2, “The works of the LORD are great, studied (drwšym; SyrP wmtbˁyn) by all them that have delight therein” (see Brettler 2009b, 64). “Knowledge” in Ode 17:12a thus connects back to “knowledge” in Ode 17:7d, and “manner/behavior of precepts” (ˀwrḥˀ dhlkth) in 17:8a anticipates “my study” (wbˁwty) in 17:12b.

17:15 “because they became my members, / and I became their leader.” The passage is likely influenced by Syriac Ps. Sol. 17:41, “. . . he (i.e., the messiah) is the head (ryšˀ) of a great people.” The Greek text (v. 36) reads “that he may rule (archein) a great people.” (NETS) “Leader” is one of the standard ways to render ryšˀ.

17:16 “Praise to you, our leader, anointed master.” To maintain the distinction between the messiah and God, here and in 24:1 and 39:11, this translation renders “master” rather than “Lord” or “lord.” The odist derives the phrase mryˀ mšyḥˀ (used three times in the Odes of Solomon) from Ps. Sol. 17:32. The similar phrase christos kuriou occurs in Ps. Sol. 18 superscription and 18:7; the equivalent occurs in Ode 29:6. Praise is appropriate for a human figure such as the king in Psalm 72 (whom Tg. Pss. identifies as the messiah), as illustrated by verses 15, 17, “that they may . . . bless him all the day . . . May his name endure for ever; may his name be continued as long as the sun. . . .” Verse 17 reads in Tg. Pss.: “May his name be invoked for ever; and before the sun came to be his name was determined; so all the peoples will be blessed by his merit, and they shall speak well of him” (Cook translation).

18:1b “that I might praise him on account of <his> name.” With Schultheß 1910, The Nuhra Version (2021) emends “my name” to “his name.” See Lattke 2009, 253: “The suggested emendation” [‘his name’ by Schultheß] does not, in fact, make any better sense [than the manuscript’s ‘my name’]. . . .” On the contrary, the emendation makes better sense with reference to Ode 6:7a: “And he gave to us his praise on account of his name.”

18:3b “and they ceased.” Literally, “and they stood (mobile).” Ms H: “it stood”; Ms N: “they stood.”

18:4b Ms H: “do not remove/deprive me”; Ms N: “do not cast away from me.” “Do not deprive me of your utterance!” This is based on Ps 119:43.

18:7c “and protect everyone from getting held fast by misfortunes.” This rendering is informed by Reinink 1974, 67.

18:12b Ms H: “they”; Ms N: “and they.”

19:1b “and I drank it with the sweet taste of the Lord’s sweetness.” The two different terms for sweetness here, bḥlywtˀ dbsymwth, are matched perfectly in the ḥlyˀtˀ and wbsymyn of Tg. Ps. 19:11b: “and more pleasant (wbsymyn) than honey or the sweet (ḥlyˀtˀ) honeycombs” (Cook 2001). This is the first of many allusions to Psalm 19 in Ode 19.

19:2c Ms H: “and the holy spirit milked him”; Ms N: “and she who milked him is the holy spirit.”

19:2-3 That God the Father would be described with breasts is congruent with the Hebrew biblical divine name ˀEl Šaddai understood as “ˀEl with breasts” and with LXX Song 1:2, which attributes female breasts (mastoi) to the male lover, whom later tradition allegorizes as God; see Bregman 2017, 261, 272. LXX Song 1:2 is the source of the description of Jesus with female breasts (mastoi) in Rev 1:13; see Rainbow 2007. The language of divine “breasts” and “womb” in Ode 19 is inspired by Gen 49:25; see Drijvers 1980, 344-345. Despite some interpreters’ claims, the breasts in Ode 8:16b and Ode 14:2 are not those of the messiah, but of God the Father, just as in Ode 19:2-3.

19:3b The stich alludes to the description of the messianic age in Isa 65:23 when one will not toil in vain (see the annotation on Ode 19: 7b-8). Milking is a chore or toil, but in the divine sphere it is not done in vain.

19:4a “her womb” could be easily emended to “his womb,” i.e., the father’s womb, which would create a parallel to John 1:18 “the bosom/womb (kolpos) of the father.” However, Morrison 1980, 82, 368 presents strong reasons for retaining “her bosom,” the reading of both H and N. Because both mss are pointed fem., pace Lattke 2009, 273, emending to masc. is not “a very minor change to the manuscript text. . . .” Lattke writes that this emendation “can be justified by appeal to the probable Greek original.” This overlooks that the two manuscripts factually exist, while a Greek Vorlage is hypothetical.

19:4b-5a “mixed the milk . . .  gave the mixture to the age.” The mixing of the milk is an adaptation of Lady Wisdom mixing wine and water in Prov 9:5. (The Lady Wisdom passages of Proverbs 8-9 are also the source of many of the statements about Lady Torah in Psalm 19.)

19:6a “caught it.” The verb gpt, a form of gwp, includes not only the meanings “to couple” and “to embrace,” but also “to catch with a net,” including the catching especially of doves. The noun gwp means “net,” “dragnet,” but the noun gpˀ, “wing,” also comes to mind in the context of Ode 19. The noun gpˀ occurs in Odes 24:4 and 28:la, c. Ode 28:5 uses the term knpˀ, which means both “wings” and “bosom.” The term for “womb” in Ode 19:6, krsˀ, occurs also in Ode 28:2. The odist thinks of the divine spirit as a dove. By using the verb gpt, Ode 19 suggests that the young woman’s womb is like a net that catches the bird-like holy spirit.

19:6, 7 “young woman” (btūltā), not necessarily “virgin,” although the latter state is usually to be presupposed for a btūltā. On this rendering, see Wenham 1972. I would add to Wenham’s observations that SyrP renders nˁrwt btwlwt in Hebrew Esther 2:2 simply as ˁlymtˀ.

19:7a “abundant mercies” originate not from the young woman but from God. The language brḥmˀ sgyˀˀ does not match Luke 1:58 in either OS Sin or SyrP. The phrase in Ode 19:7a reflects instead a combination of mrḥmnˀ and wsgyˀˀ ṭybwth in Exod 34:6. It is probable, however, that Exod 34:6 has inspired Luke 1:58. The same Torah verse is alluded to in John 1:16-17, which is introduced by a mention of John the Baptizer in 1:15. If Ode 28:2 appropriates Luke 1:44b, “the babe [i.e., John the Baptizer] in my womb leaped for joy,” then the Odist is compared to John the Baptizer, not to Jesus. It should not be overlooked that the Odist drinking the divine milk in Ode 19:1 is comparable to the young woman who later conceives by assimilating the same divine milk, carried by the holy spirit, into her womb.

19:7b-8: “and she was in labor and bore a son. / And she felt no pain, / because (the labor) was not in vain.” This passage’s trope of painless birth is inspired by 2 Bar. 73:7. Isaiah 11 and 65 inspired the description of the messianic kingdom in 2 Bar. 73-74, and the 2 Baruch passage has influenced both Odes 18-19 (cf. dmlkwth in 2 Bar. 73:1 with mlkwth in Ode 18:3c and cf. wkwrhnˀ ntrḥq in 2 Bar. 73:3 with kwrhnˀ ˀtrḥqw in Ode 18:3a). See SyrP Isa 65:23, “They shall not labor (nlˀwn) (variant nˀlwn, wail/howl) in vain (lsryqwtˀ), or give birth (nwldwn) for a curse (llwṭtˀ).” From this verse, Ode 19:7-8 has joined sryqwtˀ to nwldwn, substituting sryqwtˀ with the synonymous spyqˀyt (corresponding to Gk. kenos and Heb. rq/ryq; the latter is cognate to Syriac sryqwtˀ). This was likely facilitated by reading the verb in Isa 65:23a as “wail,” “howl,” and understanding it as congruent with nwldwn, “give birth” in 23b. In turn, Isa 65:23 anticipates Isa 66:7: “Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man-child.” Cf. the term spyqˀyt in the Magnificat, Syr P Luke 1:53.

19:9b “a strong man” (gbrˀ)”; cf. gbr/gbrˀ in J. Payne Smith 1903, 59b: “man (especially a strong or mighty man. . .).” It makes no sense to talk of a woman who gives birth “like a man” since men do not give birth. Because the verb ˀḥy does not mean “deliver,” in this verse gbrˀ must refer not to the infant but to God as life-sustainer, which contextually suggests a divine role as midwife, as in Pss 22:10-11 and 71:6.

19:10-11 “will … declaration … abundant majesty … redemption … kindness … grandeur.” These are all divine attributes that originate from God, not from the young woman. The six terms mimic the six Torah titles in Ps 19:8-10. The implication is that the young woman’s son is a manifestation of the divine word/speech.

19:10a “<And> she brought forth” (<w>yldt). An initial waw has possibly dropped out of the text. There should be some hesitation, however, in adopting this emendation, given that a structural parallel in the six stichs of Ode 12:4 (also inspired by Ps 19:8-10) also has one line (12:4b) that lacks an initial waw.

19:10b, 11c The double use of the cognate terms “declaration” in 10b and “declare” in 11c form an inclusio, and reflect the repetition of the verb “to give birth” (yld) in 10a-b. This is congruent with the repetition of the verb mḥwˀ  in SyrP Ps 19:2-3 and its cognate in Tg. Pss. in the same two verses. The repetition of the verb “to give birth” (yld) in Ode 19:10a-b is congruent with the odist’s penchant for using repetition for emphasis (see, e.g., the repetition of the phrase “I will not fear” in Ode 5:10-11). The verb yldt in Ode 19:10a-b has been inspired partly by a reading that agrees with the cognate plural noun “infants” (ylwdˀ) in SyrP Ps 19:8b.

19:10c “majesty.” The base lemma of the noun “majesty,” ˀḥdnˀ, is the verb ˀḥd, whose Hebrew cognate ˀḥz coincides with the name Ahaz, to whom Isa 7:14 is addressed: “Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: behold, the young woman shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” (JPS 1917) The terms “majesty” and “grandeur” are political terms pertaining to God’s reign or kingdom. With Ode 19:10 bˀwḥdnˀ sgyˀˀ cf. 1 Macc 15:29, “and you have taken possession of many places (SyrP sgyˀˀ dˀwḥdnh) in my kingdom.”

20:5a Ms H: “your”; Ms N: “my.”

20:5a-b “your mind.” Literally, “your kidneys”; “your feelings,” literally, “your intestines/bowels.”

20:6a “kill your own soul” (bdmˀ dnpšk). Because dmˀ can mean not only “blood,” but also “bloodshed” (homicide; see R. Payne Smith 1901, 2:910), this perplexing term can be understood upon further reflection as “with/through (causing) the bloodshed of your own soul.” The idea is that owning a slave kills the soul of the owner. As Lattke 2009, 292 clarifies, the text speaks of possessing, not acquiring; that is, the ownership, not the initial act of purchase. The statement would then be addressed to those who own, that is, who have already purchased, a slave. This naturally implies a total ban on slavery, which brings to mind Essene values. The inspiration for bdmˀ dnpšk in Ode 20:6a is Gen 9:5, “your blood of your lives” (dmkm lnpštykm), SyrP dmkwn dnpštkwn: “And surely your blood of your lives will I require,” (JPS 1917) and Gen 9:6: “Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall that person's blood be shed; for in his own image God made humankind.” (NRSV) The verb tbˁˀ in Ode 20:6b is a reflex of “require” (ˀdrš) in Gen 9:5, which the SyrP renders with ˀtbˁ.

20:7b Ms H: “the paradise”; Ms N: “his paradise.”

20:9b Ms H: ṭybwth, “grace” (=“steadfast love”); Ms N: ṭbwth, “goodness.”   

21:1a Ms H: “arms”; Ms N: “arm.”

21:4b “free from pain,” literally, “pain was not in them.” Ms N: “not”; Ms H: omits.

21:5a “And instead a medicine and helper.” The opening two words here present a challenge to the translator. The adverb ytyrˀyt (composed of ytyr + ˀyt), “exceedingly,” “abundantly,” “increasingly,” “instead” is followed by mˁdrnytˀ, which most translators render “help,” but it can also refer to medicine, which in view of the mention of sickness in Ode 21:4 would seem to be the meaning here. However, Ode 21:5c subsequently reads “and his partnership” (wšwtpwth), a term that commonly refers to either the act of marriage or the act of intercourse. SyrP Tob 8:6A uses mˁdrnytˀ to describe Eve as a helper for/to Adam. It would therefore seem that mˁdrnytˀ in Ode 21:5 cleverly means simultaneously “medicine” and “helper.” To render šwtpwtˀ as “fellowship” seems to reflect English NT influence, where it usually renders Greek koinōnia. Although to render šwtpwtˀ as “fellowship” is not incorrect, it seems increasingly archaic and does not suggest to the average scripture reader the intimate union of marital partnership between God and humans that šwtpwtˀ implies. To mention the other main use of šwtpwtˀ, in modern English one speaks of a business partner or associate, not a business fellow.

21:6b Ms H: “worked/served/worshipped”; Ms N: “passed.” Lattke 2009, 304 contests the reading ˁbdt in Ms H, but an examination of the photograph in Harris and Mingana 1920 shows no trace of a point above the third letter, while a prominent smudged point is visible beneath it. The Ms H reading is congruent with 2 En. 21:1, “standing before the Lord’s face doing his will, . . . singing with gentle voice before the Lord’s face,” while the Ms N reading reflects 2 En. 22:6, “Michael lifted me up, and led me to before the Lord’s face.” (R. H. Charles translation) Ode 21 anticipates Ode 36, and the latter also shows contacts with 2 En. 22, by which we can deduce that the praises these two odes mention allude to the Qedušah (Kedushah) of Isa 6:3 (see 2 En. 21:1; 1 En. 39:12).

21:9b “in praise of him,” Ms N, literally, “in/with his praise”; Ms H: “and his praise.”

22:1-12 is quoted in ch. 71 of the Coptic Pistis Sophia.

22:2b “proclaimed and cast … down” (rmˀ). The annotation on Ode 21:5a documents how the term mˁdrnytˀ could simultaneously mean both “a help/er” and “medicine.” It would seem that in Ode 22:2, the verb rmˀ simultaneously carries both the meanings “cast/throw down” and “announce.” As far as we can determine, this double meaning would be impossible to express in a single English word. Consequently, this translation opts for “announces their downfall.” The Coptic translation reads “taught,” which overlaps with the semantic field of “announce.” Because rmˀ can mean “announce,” there is no need to emend rmˀ to rdˀ in order to harmonize the Syriac and Coptic texts. Ms N: “cast them down”; Ms H: omits “them.” The Coptic literally reads, “taught them about them.” The reading “taught me about them,” preserved in the commentary section of the Coptic Pistis Sophia, in part reflects the more original Syriac version. See Schmidt and MacDermot 1978, 314-317.

22:5b Ms H: “roots”; Ms N: “root.”

22:6b Ms H: “was blessed by me”; Ms N: “surrounded me,” which is congruent with the Coptic version in Pistis Sophia.

22:7a Ms H: “evil one’s venom”; Ms N: “the venom of evil.”

22:10b Ms H: “help”; Ms N: “energy.”

22:11 This translation follows the punctuation of both manuscripts. The punctuation can be changed to produce the reading: “Your way and face were imperishable, and you brought your world to destruction.” With Ode 22:11, cf. Wis 19:6a, “For the whole creation in its nature was fashioned anew,” referring to the events surrounding the exodus from Egypt.

22:12c Ms H: “you became”; Ms N: “it became.”

23:1-3 The triadic structure of Ode 23:1-3 is deliberate and anticipates the ode’s concluding triad of Father, son, and holy spirit. The three initial nouns of verses 1-3 are respectively fem. fem. masc. In v. 22b Ms N reads masc. qdyšˀ; Ms H has masc. dqwdšˀ; on the basis of Morrison 1980, 357-358, The Nuhra Version (2021) emends this to fem. dqdyštˀ. If we accept this emendation in v. 22b, then the triad of Father, son, and holy spirit would be masc. masc. fem. and would form a chiastic contrast with the fem. fem. masc. pattern of the three respective initial nouns of verses 1-3.

23:4a Ms H: “the Most High”; Ms N: “the Lord.”

23:4b Ms H omits “and you will know the steadfast love of the Lord.”

23:5a “Decree.” The letter or epistle, ˀgrtˀ, is clearly a scroll that contains a royal decree, and so in Ode 23 the sense is “decree,” and not simply “letter.”

23:5b Ms H: “His”; Ms N: “And his.”

23:6a “arrow.” The Decree partly represents the Law or Torah, and the Hebrew word torah derives from the verb yarah, whose principle meaning is to shoot (an arrow).

23:8b “seal.” All royal decrees were sealed, so there is no necessary influence here from Revelation’s scroll sealed with seven seals (Rev 5:1-9), which contrasts with the single seal in Ode 23. Ode 23 is independently inspired by the same passage that influenced Revelation 5, namely, Ezekiel 2-3, which in turn shaped the “words” and “book” that are sealed in Daniel 12, as well as the “seal” in Ode 23.

23:9a Ms H: “his seal”; Ms N: “her seal.”

23:11 The wheel (gigglā) is an angel-wheel (in Hebrew ofan, pl. ofanim) of the divine merkabah (chariot) of Ezekiel 1; see Mingana 1915, 172. Ezekiel 10 uses both the Hebrew word ofan and the Aramaic galgal (pl. galgali); see Evans 2017, 305. In Ezekiel 1, the wheels accompany the flaming cherubim. Cognate to Ezekiel 1 is Gen 3:24: “the cherubim, and the continuously rotating flaming sword.” Lichtenstein 2015 identifies this rotating sword as a scythed chariot wheel, but fails to make a connection to the flaming cherubim and wheels (ofanim) of Ezekiel 1. The angel wheel of Ode 23 who mows and cuts down all opposition is entirely congruent with the scythed wheel of Gen 3:24.

23:12b “of the kingdom and of the government,” dmlkwtˀ wdmdbrnwtˀ. Clearly, mdbrnwtˀ is used synonymously with mlkwtˀ, which excludes translations of mdbrnwtˀ such as “providence” (Charlesworth 1983) and “plan of salvation” (Lattke 2009). The key to understanding the background “of the kingdom and of the government” is to notice that in Ode 23:11-12 the Decree, which represents simultaneously the Torah and the messiah, settles over or upon the wheel that represents the divine chariot and throne, and “with the Decree,” that is, with the Torah and the messiah, “there was . . . a sign of the kingdom and of the government.” The allusion is to Isa 9:6: “of his government . . . and over his kingdom,” which the SyrP renders with šwlṭnˀ (an apt synonym of mdbrnwtˀ) and mlkwtˀ. See Ode 36:8.

23:15a Ms H: “forests”; Ms N: “peoples.”

23:16 The passage is difficult; to make it more lucid, The Nuhra Version (2021) rearranges the lines in the following sequence: v. 16a, v. 16c, v. 16b.

23:16c Ms H: “feet”; Ms N: “foot.”

23:16b Ms H: “was coming”; Ms N: “had come.”

23:17a “The Decree contained commandments.” Ms H: “The Decree was one of command (pwqdnˀ)”; Ms N: “It was a Decree and a command (pwqdnˀ).” SyrP Ps 19:9b uses pwqdnˀ to translate the Torah title “commandment of the Lord,” in Hebrew mṣwt YHWH.

23:17b Ms H: “Because”; Ms N: “And because.”

23:18a “The Decree’s head.” Baynes 2012, 185-196 shows how the term “head” in Ode 23:10 is partly derived from Psalm 40. The letter of Ode 23 that is God’s thought and will is inspired by Psalm 40, in which the Psalmist mentions God’s “thoughts” (v. 6), after which we read in vv. 8-9: “Then I said, ‘Look, I have come; in a scroll of a book it is written of me. / To do your will, O my God, I desired – and your law. . . .” (NETS) In the phrase “in the scroll of a book” (en kephalidi bibliou), the term kephalis is a diminutive form of kephalē (“head”), which explains the talk of “the head” of the epistle/letter in Ode 23. The Peshiṭta, independently of the LXX, similarly renders (but in the plural) “head of the writings/books” (ryš ktbˀ).

23:18a-b “at the Decree’s head there appeared the head that revealed itself, / even the son of the truth. . . .” Morrison 1980, 148 refers to the similar construction “Father of truth” in Ode 41:8 and points out that while the two phrases could be rendered “the true son” and “the true Father.” Nevertheless, because truth is such a core trope for the odist, it is better to avoid “true” and employ “truth” in order to express the theme most expansively. Morrison adds that in relation to truth, “Father” connotes “originator,” while “son” connotes “expression.” As Morrison 1980, 86, 148 remarks, because “son of the truth” occurs in the Odes of Solomon only here, it must have a special meaning, and that meaning is suggested by the mention of the divine will that descends, which hints at the descent of the Torah, and these together indicate that “son of the truth” points to Jewish traditions that equate truth with the Torah and that speak of truth as “the seal of God.” (Above all, this pertains to the Talmudic passage in the Gemara, Šabb. 55a, “The Holy One Blessed be He, his seal is truth”). Morrison suggests the possibility here of the “Jewish-Christian” idea of Jesus as the nomos.

23:20b Ms H: “irritated”; Ms N: “erased.”

23:22a “And (the tablet) was backed up with the authority of,” literally, “and the name of . . . was upon it.” “Name” in this context idiomatically refers to “authority,” as in the trinitarian formula in Matt 28:19; see Milavec 2003, 62-54.

23:22c “for them to rule as king (lmmlkw) forever and ever.” The verb lmmlkw is plural, the basis for adding “them” in the translation. The stich adapts Exod 15:18 (cf. SyrP nmlk lˁlm ˁlmyn), which Ps 146:10 slightly abbreviates. This is significant because Exod 15:18 is added to the Kedushah in Jewish liturgy, but absent in Christian versions of the Sanctus. This suggests that the odist correlates the Father, son, and spirit of holiness with the Kedushah’s thrice-repeated “holy.” An allusion to the Kedushah is also congruent with the angel-wheel (gyglˁ) of Ode 23:11, whose feminine gender is compatible with an allusion to the feminine holy spirit.

24 Pace almost all exegetes, only Ode 24:1-2 alludes to Jesus’ baptism; from v. 3 on, the allusion is to his crucifixion. The dove-spirit rests on Jesus’ head at his baptism. Later, in v. 4, as Morrison 1980, 268 observes, the bird-spirit departs from Jesus at his death.

24:1a Ms N: “our anointed master’s head”; Ms H: “the anointed one.” In this case, Ms H’s shorter reading is to be preferred as the more original.

24:1b “because his head belonged to her.” See Franzmann in Lattke 1986, 379: “A dove is also mentioned in 24:1, singing over the Messiah and possessing him; (that is, he is subordinate to her). This verse . . . must be translated as ‘because the head was hers.’ Thus if the dove does represent the Spirit, we have here and ordering of the characters with the Spirit above the Son.” Ibid., 418: “. . . the common construction, hwˀ ly . . . denotes ‘to have’ or ‘to possess.’ . . .” Based on Franzmann’s keen observation, we can now recognize in the dove here a symbol of the holy spirit as Jesus’ mother (congruent with Jesus’ statement in the Gospel of the Hebrews, “my mother the holy spirit”), which naturally explains why he is subordinate to the dove in Ode 24.

24:1-2 The variation between ˁl (“onto”) in 1a and ˁlwhy in 2a suggests that the latter is more likely to mean “about,” as recognized by Greßmann 1920, 28, and by Morrison 1980, 267.

24:2a As Lattke 2009, 345 remarks, doves are not songbirds, so wzmrt in 2a means “and she cooed,” not “and she sang.” However, Greßmann (see annotation on 24:1-2) sees in wzmrt an allusion to the psalms. While doves are not songbirds, they are a traditional symbol of mourning/moaning (e.g., Isa 59:11), and the setting of the crucifixion implied in Ode 24 may suggest a hint at lament psalms, such as Psalm 22, whose famous verb “forsake”/“abandon” (šbq) appears in Ode 23:4.

24:4a “the bird flew, forsook its wing.” Ms H reads prḥtˀ šbqt gpyh, “The bird forsook her wings.” In view of the parallelism with 4b it is natural to view prḥtˀ as a collective singular noun. Ms N reads prḥt šbqt gpyh, “She flew, she forsook her wings.” Prḥt in Ms N could involve an accidental omission of the terminal letter ˀ. The reading of Ms H is lucid enough; the bird stops flying. Ms N starts with the bird flying and subsequently abandoning flight. The reading of Ms N involving flight and subsequent rest actually accords well with this ode’s overall basis in the story of Noah’s flood. The dove that flies and then rests would be an echo of Gen 8:12, “Then he . . . sent forth the dove; and she did not return to him any more.” See also 4 Ezra 5:6ff.

24:7b-c “and they perished in accord with the thought / by which they had been made from of old.” The translation of this verse has been informed partly by Vleugels 2011, 309.

25:1-12 is quoted in ch. 69 of the Coptic Pistis Sophia.

25:2 Coptic “saving me, / and saving me.” Pace Lattke 2009, 358, this is not an “erroneous repetition” (dittography). Repetition is common in songs and poetry of all times and cultures.

25:3b Ms H: “and I will not see him anymore”; Ms N: “and they were no more to be seen.”

25:7b Ms H: “and all around me there will be nothing that is not light.” Ms N: “so that all around me there will be nothing that is not light,” which is congruent with the Coptic.

25:8a “Covering.” The Coptic word here usually means “shade”; but see Lattke 2009, 362. “spirit/mercy.” The Coptic of the Pistis Sophia literally reads “mercy” instead of “spirit,” a difference of only one letter, suggesting that the letter pi was possibly omitted at some point in the transmission history of this ode (see Lattke 2009, 362-363). Significantly, the Pistis Sophia elsewhere equates “mercy” with “spirit” (see Book I, chs. 61 and 62).

25:8b “she removed,” that is, the spirit removed; see Morrison 1980, 377; 386. Ms H: “the garments”; Ms N: “my garments.”

25:9a “Because your right hand lifted me up,” an allusion to Ps 118:16a. While it agrees with the LXX and SyrP against the Hebrew, nevertheless, careful analysis will not sustain the claim of Lattke 2009 that the odist here relies on the LXX. Carbajosa 2008 supplies evidence that the LXX and Peshiṭta have independently rendered the Hebrew text in a similar way. Carbajosa demonstrates that virtually all agreements between the Greek and Syriac Psalters against the Hebrew Psalter can be explained by the same process of independent translation involving coinciding interpretations. While the odist does not know the Peshiṭta Psalter, he does at times independently render the Hebrew (or Aramaic) in a way similar to the later Peshiṭta translators.

25:10a Ms H: “the truth”; Ms N: “your truth.”

26:2-3 “his Kedushah ode,” zmyrtˀ qdyštˀ dylh, literally, “his holy ode;” refers to the “holy, holy, holy” (SyrP qaddiš qaddiš qaddiš) of the Qedušah (Kedushah) prayer of Isa 6:3 (see the annotation on Ode 21:6b). This is supported by Ode 26:3b, “and the odes of his repose (dnyḥh) will never cease in silence (nšlyn),” which agrees with both the traditional description of the angelic recitation of the Qedušah as never-ceasing and never-silent and as recited in rest/tranquility (cf. the Morning Service Qedušah in S. Singer 5719/1958, 46, “in tranquil (bnḥt) joy of spirit.”) See 1 En. 39:9-14; 2 En. 21:1; 22:3; Rev 4:8; Apos. Con. 7.35, 3.

26:7 “fullness,” or “whole-offering.”

26:8-11 The Nuhra Version (2021) translation here is based on the interpretation of Morrison 1980, 498-500; 532.

26:11a “the Lord’s Wonders” is a Torah title (see Brettler 2009a, 147, and Brettler 2009b, 66) derived by the odist from Ps 111:4a and Ps 106:2 (see the latter in SyrP; cf. also Ps 119:27). Ode 26:11 is about Torah interpretation.

26:13b “and that keeps flowing (wrdˀ) for the help of those who study (dbˀyn) it.” The verb “flowing” artfully harks back to (drdˀ) in v. 9a, where it has the meaning “to teach.” Given the context of interpretative concerns in verses 11-12, and in view of the double entendre that wrdˀ delivers in v. 13b, one is justified in detecting another double entendre in dbˀyn in v. 13b. The verb bˀyn can render Hebrew drš in its late sense of to study, as in Ps 111:2, “The works of the LORD are great, studied (drwšym; SyrP wmtbˀyn) by all them that have delight therein.” (See Brettler 2009b, 64).

27:1 “honoring as holy my Lord”; in view of 26:2-3, this likely alludes to the Qedušah (Kedushah) of Isa 6:3 (see the annotations on Odes 21:6b; 26:2-3; 36:2-3, specifically 2b).

27:2 Ms H: “is his sign”; Ms N: “was prevented.”

27:2 “the spreading out (dmtḥˀ) of my hands is his sign (ˀth).” The noun ˀtˀ in Ode 23:11 is rendered “emblem” by Vleugels and Webber 2016. “Emblem” or “banner” would be a fitting translation for ˀtˀ throughout the Odes of Solomon. The Hebrew cognate is used for military banners throughout the Qumran War Scroll (1QM) and in other Hebrew texts.

27:3 “and my outward-stretching (course)” (wpšyṭwty). While pšyṭwtˀ can mean either “simplicity” or “extension” (as well as “singleness,” “generosity,” “innocence,” “publication,” etc.), a larger contextual reading of the Odes of Solomon suggests that here the meaning is primarily “extension.” However, only an intertextual analysis can reveal what this “extension” is specifically. The dynamic nature of poetry demands that pšyṭwtˀ in 27:3 is more than just a substantival restatement of the verb pšṭt (“I extended”) in v. 1a. The dynamic poetic development is shown by the introduction of “wood” (qysˀ) in v. 3. With the exception of the parallel passage in 42:1-2, the only other occurrence of qysˀ is in Ode 39 (v. 10b), where we also have in v. 7 the further lexical agreements “his sign” (see Odes 27:2 and 42:1b) and “way” (see Ode 42:2b). Of pšyṭwtˀ, we read of its cognate pštˀ in Jastrow 1246b that it can mean “extension, natural course of a river.” A comparison of Odes 27 and 39 suggests that pšyṭwtˀ in Ode 27 means an extension in the sense of a river’s course. “the level wood (bridge).” In SyrP Isa 40:3-4 we learn that in Syriac the adjective špy, “level,” is a synonym of dtryṣ in v. 3 so that the latter, like its Hebrew equivalent yšr, can mean not only vertically “straight,” “upright,” but also horizontally “straight,” that is, “plain,” “level,” “flat.” SyrP Wis 10:4 calls Noah’s ark qysˀ špyˀ (“the plain/smooth/level wood”), which is synonymous with qysˀ dtryṣ in Ode 27:3. The latter means in this instance “plain/level wood.” This becomes qysˀ pšyṭˀ in Ode 42:2a, which is again synonymous with both parallel phrases in Wis 10:4 and Ode 27:3. In the phrase in Ode 42:2a, the term pšyṭˀ (“plain”) overlaps semantically with tryṣ (“plain, level”) in 27:3. Ode 42:2b then mentions ˀwrḥh dtryṣˀ (“his level path”), as in Isa 40:3-4, over which is suspended the plain/level wood. We learn what this level wood is in Ode 39, namely, a (symbolic) wood bridge built by the Lord over the waters. For helpful discussions of these passages, see Morrison 1980, 412-419, and Connolly 1911.

28:1a “As the wings of doves over their nestlings.” This is clearly inspired by Deut 32:11 and related to SyrP Gen 1:2. BT Ḥag. 15a explains that the spirit of God in Gen 1:2 hovered “like a dove hovering over its young. . . .” It must not be overlooked that the stretching and spreading of hands in Ode 27 involves the language of bird wings, as in Deut 32:11, and it is to this verse that Ode 28:1 alludes.

28:1b Ms H: “as the beak”; Ms N: “as the beaks.”

28:3a Ms H: “at rest”; Ms N: “also at rest.”

28:4b “my head rests upon (lwth) him.” When applied to persons, the preposition lwt can mean either at or with, and here we should understand it not as with, but as at, with the sense on, upon, in analogy to the Lord and his wreath who/which in Ode 5:12 is b-ršy, “on my head,” not “with my head.” 28:4 is consequently a play on Odes 1:1, 4; 5:12; and 9:8-11.

28:5a Ms H: “I was prepared”; Ms N: “I prepared myself.”

28:6a Ms H: “and deathless life came forth and kissed me”; Ms N: “and deathless life embraced and kissed me.”

28:7a Ms H: “the spirit within me”; Ms N: “the spirit who is within me.”

28:7c Ms H: “living”; Ms N: “life.”

28:10 “And (their) unrighteousness (against) me became my salvation.” Literally, “And my unrighteousness became my salvation.” See the annotation on Ode 10:5b.

28:15b Ms H: “endured”; Ms N: “forgot.”

28:16c Ms H: “my birth was not like theirs”; Ms N: “they did not recognize my birth.”

28:17c Ms H: “they attacked me”; Ms H margin and Ms N: “cast lots upon me.”

28:18a Ms H: “later than I”; Ms N: omits “than I (had).”

28:19b “mind,” literally “heart.”

29:2b Ms H: ṭbwth, “goodness”; Ms N: ṭybwth, “grace.”

29:6b “And he appeared to me, the one who is the Lord.” For this translation, see Morrison 1980, 111-112. All of the following translations are confused and should be abandoned: Charlesworth 1983, “and considered that He is the Lord”; Lattke 2009, “and it seemed to me/I saw that he is the Lord”; Harris and Mingana 1920, “And He appeared to me that He is the Lord.”

29:7a Ms H: “him”; Ms N: “me.” Since scribes tend to smooth out texts rather than complicate them, the more difficult reading is often considered more likely to be closer to the original. On that basis, Ms H is the preferable reading. Ode 29:7 may thus be an apt example of the fluidity or shifting boundaries between the personal identities of the Odist and the messiah (see Becker 2013).

30:5b “and from his heart; the Lord is his name.” The construction dmryˀ šmh has perplexed exegetes and translators. The first key to understanding this verse is to recognize the influence that Ps 23:2-3 has exerted on the description of waters of rest that restore the soul in Ode 30:3-5. “Waters of rest” in Ps 23:2b parallel “his name” in 23:3b. The implied “waters” and explicit mention of “name” in Ode 30:5 thus imitate the “waters” and “name” in Ps 23:2-3. There is thus no justification for emending or changing the meaning of šmh in Ode 30:5b, as Charlesworth and others have done. The next key is to recognize dmryˀ šmh as the odist’s attempt to emulate in Syriac the equally perplexing Hebrew construction bYH šmw in Ps 68:5, that is, “YH is his name,” preceded by the preposition b, usually understood as the b of essence or identity. An alternative rendering of Ode 30:5b could be, “and from the mind of the Lord (goes forth) his name.” Just as divine waters, a symbol of the Torah as divine revelation, go forth from the Lord’s mouth, so from the Lord’s mind originates the revelation that is his name. A synonymy between divine word and name would accord with later kabbalistic doctrine, according to which the Torah is the divine name, the Tetragrammaton.

30:6b “in the middle (bmṣˁtˀ)”; there is no pronomial suffix to mṣˁtˀ, which should therefore not be rendered “in their midst” (pace Lattke 2009). On the basis of Ode 22:2 it is evident that mṣˁtˀ in 30:6b is a technical term for the region/s between the heights and the depths, which on the basis of Ode 34:4-5 can be identified as the (highest) heaven and earth (see Grimme 1911, 54). The middle includes the region of departed souls who, according to 1 En. 48:1 (cf. 1 En. 39:5), drink from fountains of wisdom.

31:2b Ms H: “Contempt gave”; Ms N: “Folly found.”

31:4b Ms H: “hands”; Ms N: “hand.”

31:12b “inherit,” not “instruct,” pace Charlesworth 1983. See Lattke 2009, 440.

31:13b “to whom I had been promised.” For this rendering, see Harris and Mingana 1920, 370-371. Although Lattke 2009, 441 n. 266 considers these arguments of Harris and Mingana unconvincing, Lattke fails to tell his readers why.

32:2 “who is self-existent.” Ms N: “which is of itself”; Ms H: “which is from/out of itself.” Lattke’s translation, reflecting Ms N, strikes one as odd: “and the word from that Truth which was her (own) self.” Charlesworth’s “self-originate” moves in the right direction, but the theological idea conveyed by “which is of itself” is not that of origin, since truth or God as such is without origin, even self-origin. The theological idea expressed is rather that of divine self-existence, which hints at the traditional understanding of the Tetragrammaton based on Exod 3:14-15.

33:1a “And Steadfast Love, she ran, returning to release Destruction.” Contextually viewed, the feminine personified Steadfast Love is to be correlated with the feminine bird-like holy spirit. This same basic figure appears in Revelation 12 as a celestial woman who is essentially a reflex of the Tanakh’s Lady Zion. As Morrison 1980, 195-196 explains, in Ode 33:1 Grace (Steadfast Love) returns not to forsake Destruction, but as in Rev 20:2-3, where after being bound for a thousand years, the devil “must be loosed for a little while,” so that he can then finish his final campaign of deception that will soon lead to his definitive destruction.

33:2 The passage may seem confusing, but Reinink 1974, 68 explains that the Destroyer destroys Abbadon in order to create the false impression that he was in fact opposed to evil, an interpretation supported by v. 4b, “making sure his appearance was not that of the evil one.”

33:5a “But a mature (gmyrtˀ) young woman (btwltˀ) stood.” While gmyrtˀ can mean “perfect,” the nuance in most of Syriac literature is “completion.” As in Ode 19, so here btwltˀ can mean not only “virgin,” but also “young woman.” What is meant here is “a mature young woman,” that is, someone who has passed childhood and adolescence and is now at the beginning of adulthood. In other words, here gmyrtˀ has to do with age, not with spiritual or moral perfection. Similarly, in the Qur’an 19:17 the angel Gabriel appears to Mary during the Annunciation in “the likeness of a perfect man,” fatamathala lahā bašaran sawiyyan. The Syriac text The History of the Blessed Virgin Mary indicates that what the Qur’an means by “perfect man” is an old or aged man, so as not to present a temptation to the youthful Mary. The History of the Blessed Virgin Mary folio 10a-b, p. 20: “Gabriel, the angel of the Lord, appeared unto her in the form of a venerable old man (gbrˀ sbˀ), so that she might not flee from him” (see Budge 1899).

33:13a hlkw by, literally “walk in/by.” On the rendering halakhah, see the annotation on Ode 17:8a.

33:13b “my ways I will make known to those who study (bˁy) me.” The verb bˁy can render Hebrew drš in its late sense of to study, as in Ps 111:2, “The works of the LORD are great, studied (drwšym; SyrP wmtbˁyn) by all them that have delight therein.” See Brettler 2009a, 2009b.
 
34:1a-b,d “No way (ˀwrḥˀ) is hard / where there the heart is single (pšyṭˀ),” “where thoughts are clear (tryṣtˀ).” The vocabulary of this passage clearly forms a link between Ode 27:3 and Ode 42:2-3, which indicates the meaning of tryṣtˀ here is not “upright,” but “clear,” as in Isa 40:3-4, on which see the annotation on Ode 27:3.

34:1c “strike.” The noun mḥwtˀ here must be pointed to read “blow,” “stroke,” “wound,” “plague,” or “burden,” not “fence” (pace Vleugels and Webber 2016). “Blow” supplies a fitting poetic parallelism to “storm”/“stormwind” in v. 2b, while “fence” does not. Moreover, “fence” (“parapet,” “railing,” Sokoloff-Brockelmann, 737b) is traditionally a mostly positive symbol of protection (including against plagues, see 4Q434,11), whereas Ode 34:1-2 demands a negative valence for mḥwtˀ.

34:3a “When surrounded on every side, / nothing within the good person is divided.” For this rendering, see Lattke 2009, 469. What surrounds the good person can be deduced from Ode 25:7a, “you set a lamp at my right and at my left,” which agrees with Ode 34:3 being immediately preceded by a reference to light in the word nhyrtˀ (“illuminated”/“enlightened”).

34:5b “and nothing exists below.” Charlesworth’s translation “from below” is unjustified; there is no preposition mn in the Syriac text. Charlesworth has overlooked that the verse is a spatial reworking of 2 Bar. 44:8: “Because whatever is now is nothing, but what shall be is very great.” The immediately preceding conclusion in Ode 33 is also based on 2 Baruch 44.

35:1a “Fine rain,” or possibly “dew” (see R. Payne Smith 1901, 2:3938). Ms H: “serenity”; Ms N: “gentleness.” The phrase rsysh dmryˀ in v. 1a conforms structurally to the phrase ṭlh dmryˀ (“the dew of the Lord”) in v. 5. Cf. Deut 32:2.

35:2b Ms H: “and was mine in salvation”; Ms N: “became salvation for me.”

35:3b Ms H: “judgment”; Ms N: “a judge.”

35:4a “But I was calm in the decree (ṭgmˀ, that is, teḡmeh) of the Lord.” The term ṭgmˀ can be explained on the basis of the “spirit of judgment (dynˀ)” in SyrP Isa 4:4, where dynˀ can also bear the meaning “decree.” (SyrP Ps 19:10b renders the Hebrew Torah synonym mšpṭ, “judgment,” with dynˀ). The Hebrew phrase here in Isa 4:4 is rwḥ mšpṭ, “spirit of judgment,” which Targum Pseudo-Jonathan renders with “word of decree (gmyrˀ).” In Ode 35:4a, the ṭgmˀ dmryˀ is a strictly singular, not a collective singular, and conforms structurally and doctrinally to rsysh dmryˀ in v. 1 and ṭlh dmryˀ in v. 5. The basis is in Deuteronomy 32, where Moses’ doctrine, that is, the Torah, is likened to dew. Accordingly, in Ode 35, the “fine rain of the Lord” and “the dew of the Lord” hint at the Mosaic Torah, and the same is the case with the ṭgmˀ dmryˀ, “the decree of the Lord.” In Ode 23:17 the Torah is called a “command,” pwqdnˀ, which occurs as a Torah title twice in SyrP Ps 19:9, translating Hebrew pqwd and mṣwt (“precept,” “commandment”). Just as pwqdnˀ in Ode 23 occurs nowhere else in the Odes of Solomon, the same is the case with ṭgmˀ in Ode 35.  

35:4b Emerton 1984 renders v. 4’b’s ṭllˀ as “dew,” but notes that the text could represent a defective spelling of “shade.”

35:4c structurally mimics Ps 19:11. Its construction “and more than” (wytyr mn) does not agree with SyrP Ps 19:11, but it matches Tg. Pss.

35:7 The translation here has been informed partly by Lattke, 2009.

36:1a As Lattke 2005 documents, Ms N reads ˁl, which results in the statement, “I rested upon (ˁl) the spirit of the Lord.” Ms H also originally read ˁl, but the scribe secondarily superimposed a terminal y, correcting the reading to ˁly, which produces the statement, “The spirit of the Lord rested upon me (ˁly),” coinciding with Isa 61:1. Lattke 2005, 348 writes that this would be congruent with Ode 28:1c, “so also are the wings of the spirit over my heart.” With Lattke 2009, The Nuhra Version (2021) adopts the corrected Ms H reading ˁly. Nevertheless, the shared Ms H and Ms N reading ˁl makes sense, and because of its double attestation one could make a plausible case for it as the original reading. The odist is often subversive in his scriptural allusions (cf. Lattke 2005, 248). If ˁl is the original reading, we would have in this case a subversive reading of Isa 61:1.

36:2-3 Ms H punctuation:

2 and made me stand on my feet in the height of the Lord
before his perfection and his glory.
While I was praising him by the composition of his odes,
3 she gave birth to me before the face of the Lord.

Ms N punctuation:

2 and made me stand on my feet in the height of the Lord
before his perfection and his glory,
while I was praising him by the composition of his odes.
3 She gave birth to me before the face of the Lord.

The Nuhra Version (2021) has adopted a different punctuation, one which continues the sentence of v. 3a into 3b, which does not, however, change the basic sense of v. 3. Ode 36:2b, “his fullness and his glory,” alludes to Isa 6:3, “the whole earth is full of His glory.”

36:3b See Morrison 1980, 98, which points out that Odes of Solomon contains 19 instances of the conjunction kd, and that Charlesworth translates it as “because” only in Ode 36:3 and 4, whereas the most natural meaning is “while” in both 36:2b and 4a. Because of ongoing scholarly debate about how Syriac/Aramaic bar naša should be translated, the phrase has been transliterated both here and in Ode 12:12a. Pace Reinink 1974, 68, it is not “purely speculative” for Charlesworth to render bar naša here as “Son of man,” nor is it necessary to prove that “Son of man” was a messianic title after the first century CE. Charlesworth’s evidence that Ode 36 has been shaped by 1 En 48:2, in which the title “Son of man” occurs, is sufficient justification for his rendering of Ode 36:3.

36:4a Ms H: “the ones who glorify”; Ms N: “the glorious ones.”

36:7b Ms H: “like a flood”; Ms N: omits “like.”

36:8b “the spirit of governance (dmdbrnwtˀ).” See the annotation on Ode 23:12, which documents that verse’s (and this one’s) allusion to Isa 9:6, where a figure traditionally identified as the messiah assumes the government and kingdom of David. The statement in Ode 36:8, “and I was established in the spirit of governance,” is a claim to have assumed messianic rule.

37:1a Ms H: “my Lord”; Ms N: “the Lord.”

38:2a Ms H: “chasms”; Ms N: “open (gaping) chasms.”

38:3b Ms H: “arms”; Ms N: “ladder.”

38:4b Ms H: “was”; Ms N: “was and is.”

38:7a “along the level path” (bˀwrḥˀ tryṣtˀ). As in Odes 27:3; 34:1d; and 42:2b, here tryṣtˀ means “level,” not “upright/straight.”

38:8b Ms H: “that people think to be”; Ms N: “that are thought to be.”

38:9b Ms H: “the bride who is destroyed”; Ms N: either “the bride who is destroyed” or “the bride who destroyed.”

38:13b Ms H: “make them”; Ms N: “make her” (scribal error).

38:14b Ms H: “insane”; Ms N: “begging/asking” or “demanding/commanding.”

38:15a Ms H: “deceiver”; Ms N: “deceivers.”

39:4 Ms H: “lightning”; Ms N: “lightnings.”

39:7a “the LORD” stands for “the name YHWH,” as 7b and 8a indicate. Ode 39:7-8 anticipates 42:20: “And I placed my name upon their head.” The construction of Ode 39:7a has been influenced by Ps. Sol. 15:6 (Syriac 15:8): “because the sign of the Lord is upon the righteous for their salvation.” (Harris translation)

39:11b “the footprints of our anointed master.” Lattke 2009 overlooks the origin of this language in either the Hebrew or Syriac version of Ps 89:52, “the footsteps of your messiah/anointed one.” It cannot have been derived from the LXX, which reads instead, to antallagma tou christou sou, “what had been exchanged for your anointed.” (NETS)

39:13b “his trustworthy halakhah.” See the annotation on Ode 17:8a.

40:3a-b Ms N. Cf. Ms H: “And my tongue in his songs / and my limbs in his odes.”

40:5a “reverence.” Ms H: “he who is fearing/reverencing”; Ms N: “fear/reverence,” with a positive valence (cf. 40:5b), pace Latke 2009, 563. This ode alludes to Psalm 19 (cf. Ode 40:1 with Ps 19:11), in which “the fear of the Lord” is a title for the Torah (Ps 19:10). In Ode 40:5a, fear/reverence is personified.

41:1a Ms H: “All”; Ms N: “All of us.”

41:1b Ms H: “they will receive/welcome”; Ms N: “we will receive/welcome.”

41:2a Originally the Ms N scribe wrote “and they will be known to his children,” then corrected this to read “and his children will be known to him.”

41:3a Ms H: “live”; Ms N: “rejoice.” Nowhere in Ms H is ṭybwtˀ associated with joy or rejoicing. By contrast, in Ode 15:8b ṭybwtˀ removes mortality; the theme of rescue from death in Ode 29:4 is followed in the next stich (v. 5a) by a mention of ṭybwtˀ; in Ode 37:4 from ṭybwtˀ comes rest, a traditional term for immortality. Consequently, in Ode 41:3b, the preferable reading arguably is Ms H’s “live.” Cf. Deut 30:19.

41:4b Ms H: “has given to us”; Ms N: “has given.”

41:6b “and let our minds study (wnthgwn) his Love, reading it in a low voice by night and by day (bllyˀ wbˀymmˀ).” “Minds,” literally “hearts,” but ancient Semitic-speaking peoples believed the heart was the organ of thought. For the rendering of hgh (=Syriac hgy) as “study . . . reading in a low voice,” see Sommer 2012, 209, and Brettler 2012, 196. Researchers have long recognized in wnthgwn . . . bllyˀ wbˀymmˀ an allusion to Ps 1:2, “and in his law he meditates day and night,” but in fact the allusion is instead to Josh 1:8, which in SyrP reads, rnˀ bh bllyˀ wbˀymmˀ. The use of the verb rny rather than hgy in Ode 41:6b indicates, however, that the odist does not use SyrP Joshua. 

41:9b is dependent on the Hebrew text of Prov 8:22, while Ode 41:10a agrees with LXX Prov 8:25. The most natural explanation for this is that the odist has independently rendered the Hebrew text of Proverbs in a way that coincides with the way the Greek translator rendered Prov 8:25. Ode 41:9-10 then transitions to Lady Wisdom of Proverbs 8, which extends the theme of Torah in Ode 41:6b, since Torah is Lady Wisdom (see Sirach 24). Psalm 119 also alludes to Proverbs 8, and Psalm19 is informed by Proverbs 8.

41:14 “in him (bh),” not “with him;” the latter idea is expressed differently, not with the prepositional prefix b-, but with lht, as in SyrP John 1:1.

41:15a Lattke 2009, 579, understands the line to mean “The Christ/Messiah in truth is one.” However, Grimme 1911, 95-96 translates the line as “The anointed one is one with (divine) truth,” which arguably fits the context better. In this case, Truth is a title for God (see v. 9a “the Father of truth”), as in Ode 32:2 and throughout Ode 38. “Truth” in 41:15a refers back to the Most High and Father of verses 13-14 and anticipates “the truth of his name,” that is, the Father’s name, in v. 16a.

42:1-2 Verses 1-2 seem integral to Ode 42, and not a later interpolation, because with them included in the text, Ode 42 has a total of 42 stichs, which does not strike one as accidental.

42:2a “and my outward-stretching (course) is the plain wood (bridge).” On this translation, see the annotation on Ode 27:3.

42:2b “that was suspended over his level way.” On the translation “level” for dtryṣˀ, see the commentary on Ode 27:3. On the translation “his level way” rather than “the way of the upright one,” see Connolly 1913-1914, 468, and Lattke 2009, 584. In Syriac, although tryṣˀ might plausibly in some instances be construed as “the upright one,” it is not tryṣˀ but zdyqˀ that generally renders “the righteous one.”

42:3a-b Ms H has a shorter and variant text: “to those who knew me / who were not able to keep me in their clutches.” 

42:4-5 The passage is difficult; to make it more lucid, The Nuhra Version (2021) rearranges the lines in the following sequence: v. 5a, v. 4, v. 5b-c.

42:13b Ms H: “for/because they”; Ms N: “for/because he.”

42:19b Ms H omits this stich through haplography (the inadvertent omission of repeated letters).

42:20a Ms H reads wsmlt, a misspelling of wsmt, “and I set,” which is Ms N’s reading.

Bibliography

Barnes, W. E. “An Ancient Christian Hymn Book.” Exp Series 7 10 (1910): 52-63.

Becker, Adam H. “Polishing the Mirror: Some Thoughts on Syriac Sources and Early Judaism.” Pages 897-915 in Envisioning Judaism: Studies in Honor of Peter Schäfer on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Volume 2. Edited by Raʿanan Boustan et al. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013.

Bregman, Marc. “Mordecai Breastfed Esther: Male Lactation in Midrash, Medicine, and Myth.” Pages 257-274 in The Faces of Torah: Studies in the Texts and Contexts of Ancient Judaism in Honor of Steven Fraade. Edited by Michal Bar-Asher Siegal, Tzvi Novick, and Christine Hayes. Journal of Ancient Judaism Supplements 22. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017.

Brettler, Marc Zvi. “A Jewish Approach to Psalm 111?” Pages 141-159 in Jewish and Christian Approaches to Psalms. Edited by Marianne Grohmann and Yair Zakovitch. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 2009a.

Idem. “Psalms and Jewish Biblical Theology.” Pages 187-197 in Jewish Bible Theology: Perspectives and Case Studies. Edited by Isaac Kalimi. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2012.

Idem. “The riddle of Psalm 111.” Pages 62-73 in Scriptural Exegesis: The Shapes of Culture and the Religious Imagination: Essays in Honour of Michael Fishbane. Edited by Deborah A. Green and Laura S. Lieber. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009b.

Brock, Sebastian. Review of James H. Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973. BSOAS 38/1 (1975): 142-143.

Bruston, Charles. Les plus anciens cantiques chrétiens: Traduits sur la seconde edition du texte syriaque avec une introduction et des notes. Geneva: Jeheber; Paris: Fischbacher, 1912.

Budge, E. A. Wallis. I: The History of the Blessed Virgin Mary. II: The History of the Likeness of Christ. The Syriac Texts. English Translations. Luzac’s Semitic Texts and Translations Series 4-5; London: Luzac, 1899.

Carbajosa, Ignacio. The Character of the Syriac Version of Psalms: A Study of Psalms 90-150 in the Peshitta. Monographs of the Peshitta Institute Leiden: Studies in the Syriac Versions of the Bible and their Cultural Contexts 17. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2008.

Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Volume 2. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1985.

Connolly, R. H. “The Odes of Solomon: Jewish or Christian?” JTS 50/1 (1911): 298-309.

Cook, Edward M. Targum Psalms: An English Translation (2001):  <http://www.targum.info/pss/tg_ps_index.htm>.

Drijvers, Han J. W. “The Nineteenth Ode of Solomon: Its Interpretation and Place in Syrian Christianity.” JTS 31/2 (1980): 337-355.

Emerton, John Adney. “The Odes of Solomon.” Pages 683-731 The Apocryphal Old Testament. Edited by H. F. D. Sparks. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984.

Evans, Annette. “Ezekiel’s ‘Living Beings’ in Pseudo-Ezekiel 4Q385, Frg. 6: A Comparison with Key Angelological Verses in Ezekiel 1 and 10.” OTE 30/2 (2017): 300-314.

Flemming, Johannes, and Adolf Harnack. Ein jüdisch-christliches Psalmbuch aus dem ersten Jahrhundert. Aus dem Syrischen übersetzt von Johannes Flemming. Bearbeitet und herausgegben von Adolf Harnack. TU 35.4; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1910.

Franzmann, Majella. “A Study of the Odes of Solomon with Reference to the French Scholarship 1909-1980.” Pages 371-426 in Michael Lattke. Die Oden Salomos in ihrer Bedeutung für Neues Tetstament und Gnosis. Band III: Forschungsgeschichtliche Bibliographie 1799-1984 mit kritischen Anmerkungen. Mit einem Beitrag von Majella Franzmann, A Study of the Odes of Solomon with Reference to the French Scholarship 1909-1980. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 25/3. Freiburg Schweiz: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986.

Greßmann, Hugo. “Die Sage von der Taufe Jesu und die vorderasiatische Taubengöttin.” AR 20 (1920): 1-40.

Grimme, Hubert. Die Oden Salomos: Syrisch-Hebräisch-Deutsch. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung, 1911.

Harris, James Rendel, and Alphonse Mingana. The Odes and Psalms of Solomon. 2 Volumes. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1916/1920.

Jastrow, Marcus. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli Yerushalmi and the Midrashic Literature. London: W. C. Luzac / New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1903. 

Joosten, Jan. “Odes de Salomon 7,3a: Observations sur un hellénisme dans le texte syriaque.” ZNW 89 (1998): 279-281.

Lattke, Michael. Die Oden Salomos in ihrer Bedeutung für Neues Tetstament und Gnosis. Band Ia: Der syrische Text der Edition in Esṭrangelā. Faksimile des griechischen Papyrus Bodmer XI. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 25/1a. Freiburg Schweiz: Universitätsverlag / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1980.

Idem. “Eine übersehene Textvariante in den Oden Salomos (OdSal 36,1a).” ZAC 8 (2005): 346-350.

 Idem. Odes of Solomon: A Commentary. Translated by Marianne Ehrhardt. Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009.

Lichtenstein, Murray H. “The Fearsome Sword of Genesis 3:24.” JBL 134/1 (2015): 53-57.

van der Lugt, Pieter. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry with Special Reference to the First Book of the Psalter. Oudtestamentische Studiën, Old Testament Studies 53. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2005.

Idem. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry II: Psalms 42–89. Oudtestamentische Studiën, Old Testament Studies 57. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2010.

Idem. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry III: Psalms 90–150 and Psalm 1. Oudtestamentische Studiën, Old Testament Studies 63. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2013.

Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis, and Commentary. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2003.

Mingana, Alphonse. “Quelques mots sur les odes de Salomon: II.” ZNW 16 (1915): 167-190.

Morrison, Alan Thomas. A literary and theological comparison between the odes of Solomon and the Johannine literature, Durham theses, Durham University, 1980. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: <http://etheses.dur.ac.uk7525/>.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. Sufi Essays. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1972.

Nöldeke, Theodor. Compendious Syriac Grammar. London: Williams & Norgate, 1904.

Payne Smith, J., ed. A Compendious Syriac Dictionary: Founded Upon the Thesaurus Syriacus of R. Payne Smith. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1903.

Payne Smith, R., ed. Thesaurus Syriacus. 2 Volumes. Oxford, Clarendon, 1879, 1901. Repr., Hildesheim/New York: Olms, 1981.

Rainbow, Jess. “Male μαστοί in Revelation 1:13.” JSNT 30/2 (2007): 249-253.

Reinink, G. J. Review of James H. Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973. JSJ 5/1 (1974): 64-68.

Schultheß, Friedrich. “Textkritische Bemerkungen zu den syrischen Oden Salomos.” ZNW 11 (1910): 249-258.

Shamun, Bailis Yamlikha. English-Assyrian-Arabic Dictionary. Lillington, NC: Bailis Yamlikha Shamun, 2014.

Singer, S. The Standard Prayerbook: Authorized English Translation. New York: Bloch Publishing Company, 5719/1958.

Sokoloff, Michael. A Syriac Lexicon: A Translation from the Latin, Correction, Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann’s Lexicon Syriacum. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns / Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2009.

Sommer, Benjamin D. “Psalm 1 and the Canonical Shaping of Jewish Scripture.” Pages 199-221in Jewish Bible Theology: Perspectives and Case Studies. Edited by Isaac Kalimi. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 2012.

Steiner, Richard C. Disembodied Souls: The Nefesh in Israel and Kindred Spirits in the Ancient Near East, with an Appendix on the Katumuwa Inscription. Ancient Near East Monographs 11. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2015. Online at: <https://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/pubs/9781628370775_OA.pdf>.

Idem. “Does the Biblical Hebrew Conjunction - ו Have Many Meanings, One Meaning, or No Meaning at All?” JBL 119/2 (2000): 249-267.

van Unnik, W. C. “A Note on Ode of Solomon xxxiv 4.” JTS OS 37 146/1 (1936): 172-175.

Vaillant, A. Le livre des Secrets d’Hénoch: Texte Slave et Traduction Française. Paris: Institut d’études slaves, 1952.

Vleugels, Gie. “The Destruction of the Second Temple in the Odes of Solomon.” Pages 303-310 in Das heilige Herz der Tora: Festschrift für Hendrik Koorevaar zu seinem 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Siegbert Riecker and Julius Steinberg. Aachen: Shaker Verlag, 2011.

Idem with Martin Webber. The Odes of Solomon: Syriac text and English translation with text critical and explanatory notes. Mōrān Ethō 41. Kerala, India: St. Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 2016.

Wenham, Gordon J. “Genesis.” Pages 32-74 in Eerdmans Bible Commentary. Edited by James D. G. Dunn and John William Rogerson. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003.

Idem. “Betûlāh ‘A Girl of Marriageable Age.’” VT 22/3 (1972): 326-348.