Aramaic Bowl Spells

Shaked, Shaul; Ford, James Nathan; Bhayro, Siam

doi:10.1163/9789004229372

Cited by 38 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The majority of scholarly work on the bowls has thus far been in the form of publications, translations and commentaries on specific bowls or collections of bowls (Franco 1979; Naveh and Shaked 1985, 1993; J.B. Segal 2000; Levene 2003a; Shaked et al 2013). Determining the religious identities of the bowl scribes and clients is complicated by the cross-cultural appearance of certain names and dialects of Aramaic, the blurring of communal boundaries and the possibilities that clients may have gone to scribes of different religious backgrounds, and they have only recently begun to be used as social historical evidence (Morony 2003: 95; 2007: 417-19; Ahuvia 2014: 150-59).…”

Section: Amulets and Incantation Bowlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intermediary Beings in Late Antique Judaism: A History of Scholarship

Ronis

2015

Currents in Biblical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent years have seen a steady rise in the scholarly interest in intermediary beings in Late Antique Judaism. The present article traces developments in the academic study of intermediary beings, and surveys scholarly approaches to angels, demons, and other intermediary beings in (1) rabbinic literature, (2) Late Antique Jewish liturgy, (3) Hekhalot literature, and (4) material artifacts such as metal amulets and clay bowls. It traces a shift from a nineteenth-century discomfort with intermediary beings and a concomitant suggestion that such beings are a foreign import and corruption, to a more recent interest in examining how intermediary beings functioned within a dynamic and transcultural Late Antique Jewish world. The article concludes by proposing new and continued areas of interest for scholars of Late Antique Judaism.

show abstract

Section: Amulets and Incantation Bowlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intermediary Beings in Late Antique Judaism: A History of Scholarship

Ronis

2015

Currents in Biblical Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In an introduction to magical divorce texts, Shaked highlights the concept of the "performative utterance," which he defines as "a phrase that creates, by the fact that it is uttered in a specific situation and in a determined manner, a new social or legal status." 80 In the case of bans, both rabbinic law and the magical incantations attempt to effect change to the status of the banned entity by utilizing bans as a means of preventing, via a threat, 81 a human violation or a metaphysical entity's evil intent. Bans are verbal curses that harm the body and change one's status in the community-but while for the Talmud bans lead to physical separation and symbolic death, exhibited through the rites of mourning, which inflict pain upon a sinner, for the Aramaic bowl spells the sorcerers use bans to repel from clients those demons that infect them with disease.…”

Section: Bowlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And may you be under the ban of all demons and dark ones that are in Babylonia. 90 This bowl, which mentions the demons of Babylonia, heals the family of Abudimme son of Daday. After repeating the formula "and may you be under the ban of," the incantation brings in a series of powerful and liminal figures who appear in multiple cultures in late antique Iran, such as Ashmedai and Rav Yosef (Joseph) Sheda.…”

Section: Bowlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Excommunication in Jewish Babylonia: ComparingBavli Mo‘ed Qaṭan14b–17b and the Aramaic Bowl Spells in a Sasanian Context

Mokhtarian

2015

H. Theolo. Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to rabbinic literature of late antiquity, a Jew could be excommunicated or banished from the community for around twenty-four spiritual and social violations. The Talmuds’ list of sins that necessitated the separation of a transgressor includes, for instance, profaning the name of God, selling forbidden meat, insulting one's master, and obstructing justice. Once condemned, the sinner was physically isolated from other people and prohibited from the same actions that a mourner was, such as cutting one's hair or wearing phylacteries. After the sinner repented or a certain amount of time passed, the ban was then lifted, typically by the master who had initiated it. Indeed, the master-disciple relationship is often at the center of banning and cursing in rabbinic literature. Although the rabbinic concept of excommunication draws from earlier biblical and Second Temple precedents, such as the book of Ezra, it is in many ways a late antique innovation featuring prominently in Babylonia. The reason that bans and excommunication emerge as a salient feature of Jewish society in this period is related to the rabbis’ historical contexts within Roman Palestine and Sasanian Babylonia. As I show in this article, exegesis and history both played a role in the formation of the talmudic laws of banishment.

show abstract

“…Müller-Kessler 2001–02: 128b read עד אמיר נמטי זבז ואידן. See also MS 1928/22: 9: עדאמי למישרא שמיא וארעה ‘until the dissolution of heaven and earth’ (Shaked, Ford and Bhayro, forthcoming). The consistent plene spelling of this word in the incantation bowls suggests that the related term עדאמא ד ‘until’ in Moussaieff 163: 24 should be analysed as a plene spelling of עדמא ד, rather than a misspelling of it (see Morgenstern 2007a: 18 and contrast MK, no.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 117 For שלוניתא (with waw for qamaṣ ), see Levene and Bohak 2012: 208. For the phonetic variants, see Shaked, Ford and Bhayro 2013: 268 (note to line 2), and Wolfe 39: 3 (שלנניתא). The phonetic variant שניתא occurs in K3449: 5 (Geller 1980: 60) and in the unpublished parallel VA 2485: 8. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On some readings and interpretations in the Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts

Morgenstern

Ford

2017

Bull. Sch. Orient. Afr. stud.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study takes a new look at a number of obscure passages in the Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts discussed in Christa Müller-Kessler's article “More on puzzling words and spellings in Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts”, published inBSOAS75/1, 2012, 1–31. Among the words discussed are ברזא ‘wild boar’, מנוביא ‘wailing’, מסחיפתא ‘overthrower (type of demon)’, ספסיפא ‘burning’ and פרהזני ‘protectors’, all new to the Jewish Babylonian Aramaic lexicon, ככא ‘tusk’ and תברי “‘broken’ sounds of theshofar(as a maleficent force)”, which show new meanings for previously attested lexemes, and the new plural form שולניתא ‘maidservants’. Additional evidence for the words or expressions פגיתא ‘attack (a type of demon)’, אידיורא ‘helper’ / אידיורותא ‘help’, חי חי מץ (a divine epithet), מרוביא (a type of demon), נירבא (a hard metal) and שיפורי ‘shofars(a type of demon)’ is also adduced and a preliminary edition of the magic bowl Nippur 12 N 387 is presented.

show abstract

Aramaic Bowl Spells

Cited by 38 publications

References 0 publications

Intermediary Beings in Late Antique Judaism: A History of Scholarship

Intermediary Beings in Late Antique Judaism: A History of Scholarship

Excommunication in Jewish Babylonia: ComparingBavli Mo‘ed Qaṭan14b–17b and the Aramaic Bowl Spells in a Sasanian Context

On some readings and interpretations in the Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About