In memory of Sam Borodach, z”l
(1:2 and elsewhere) נינוה: It is of interest that the cuneiform sign for this city is a fish within a house. (An interesting connection to our story!) Also, “nun” means “fish” in Aramaic. But the entry in the Encyclopaedia Judaica (12:1168) concludes that the name of the city is of Hurrian origin, so we do not know what it means. Hurrian is an old language, not related to any Semitic one.
As further background to the story, a prophet Yonah ben Amitai is mentioned at Kings 2, 14:25 in connection with the reign of Jeroboam, son of Joash (early 8th century BCE). Presumably this is our Yonah, so we now know the time period of our story. A century later (late 7th century BCE), Assyria was attacked by its former vassals: Babylonians, Chaldeans, Medeans, Persians and others. The Assyrian city of Nineveh was destroyed in 612 BCE.
(1:5) מלחים: This word for sailors only appears here and in the book of Ezekiel. I was sure its origin had to do with מלח and the saltiness of the sea. But it turns out that it is a word that Akkadian borrowed from the older language of Sumerian (a non-Semitic language). In Sumerian, “ma” means “ship” and “lah” means “to steer.” Hence, the word means: one who steers a ship.
(1:6) החבל רב: The root חבל has four different meanings. One of them is “bind” (e.g., with a rope). These men are all involved with the ropes of the ship. The rav is the chief. The other meanings of this root are: destroy/damage, pains of the expectant mother and pledge. (Perhaps the “pledge” meaning derives from the “bind” meaning.) Which meaning do you think is used in the phrase מות חבלי at Psalms 116:3? See my “Roots and Rituals,” pages 97-99. (Short answer: Most likely, the “bind” meaning. The image is of a trapped animal.)
(2:8) התעטף: Here, we have the root עטף with the meaning “feeble, faint.” The phrase here is: “behitatef alay nafshi.” The continuation of the verse is that at that point he remembered God and prayed. This root appears with this meaning 13 times in Tanach. Yet, this root appears two other times in Tanach with a different meaning: “cover.” See Psalm 65:14 and 73:6.
Ernest Klein—in his etymology book—writes that most scholars derive the “feeble, faint” meaning from the “cover” meaning. I question this, and am not even sure what the possible relation is. Klein did not explain it. Daat Mikra on our verse suggests that a feeble person’s strength is being covered up. See also Daat Mikra to Psalm 61:3 and 107:5. Mandelkern cites Radak for a different suggestion and Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch makes a suggestion as well (see, e.g., his comments on Psalm 61:3). I did not find any of these suggestions convincing.
In Tanach, the hitpael is used only in connection with the “feeble, faint” meaning (six times). Yet, our Sages took the hitpael form and used it in our blessing for the טלית, using it instead with the “cover” meaning (cover oneself)!
As to the meaning of “feeble, faint” in the hitpael, it is difficult to understand. Sometimes, words that are in the nifal develop an added ת, and misleadingly look as if they are in the hitpael. I think that is what happened here. I gave many examples in my “Roots and Rituals,” page 245. See, e.g., Psalm 92:10: “yitpardu kol poalei aven” (despite the use of the hitpael, “the evildoers are not scattering themselves”) and Proverbs 31:30: “ishah yirat Hashem hi tithallal” (despite the use of the hitpael, “the woman is not praising herself”).
Daat Mikra to Psalm 102:1, no. 2, subsection 3, essentially agrees. It comments, with regard to this meaning of עטף, that there is no meaningful distinction between the kal, nifal and hitpael.
עטף has a third meaning at Job 23:9: “turn to the side.” See Brown Driver Briggs and Daat Mikra.
(2:5 and elsewhere) היכל: This word appears many times in Nach. (But it is never in Joshua or Judges.) It means “big house, palace.” It is found in Akkadian (“ekallu”) and was borrowed from Sumerian.
(3:5 in the plural, and elsewhere) שק: In Tanach, this word means both: 1) a sack to hold items like grain and 2) a garment worn in mourning and humiliation. The widespread view is that the origin of the English word is the Greek “sakkos” and that this Greek word was borrowed from the Semitic word.
But which of the two Semitic meanings came first: the sack of grain meaning or the garment meaning? Could one have developed from the other? Most likely, that is not what happened. Rather, the origin is the material used for both. The word refers to something made from goat’s hair or a similar animal. See the JPS Leviticus Commentary on Leviticus 11:32. See also the post at balashon.com of 12/24/06, and Daat Mikra to Esther 4:1. (Note that the book of Yonah, at 3:8, is the only place in Tanach where animals wear a שק.)
(4:6 and elsewhere) קיקיון: This word appears five times in our book. Surprisingly, or perhaps unsurprisingly, it appears nowhere else in Tanach. Ernest Klein’s etymology book suggests “castor tree, ricinus.” (Perhaps that is helpful to at least one reader! Yehuda Feliks has written much on topics like this. See, e.g., his “Olam HaTzomeach HaMikrai.”)
(2:3) שאול: The netherworld location שׁאול is mentioned over 60 times in Tanach. On the simplest level, it is a large place, located deep underground, where the bodies and spirits of dead people dwell—perhaps, spending most of their time sleeping.
But some of these times, שׁאול refers only to an individual grave, and other times, it is used merely as a metaphor for distress. In our verse, Yonah cries out from the “beten” of “sheol.” Perhaps “distress” is the meaning of “sheol” here, or perhaps, the depths of the belly of the large fish was analogous to “sheol,” or perhaps, Yonah already considered himself among the dead when he cried out.
As to the etymology of the word, I have seen the suggestion that we should not view the שׁ as a root letter. Rather, the root of the word is אל. This two-letter word appears many times in Tanach as a word of negation, and seems to have originally meant “nothing.” With the שׁ as a prefix, the word could have meant “place of nothingness.” Alternatively, a very interesting suggestion is made by Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch (commentary to Psalm 9:18). He states that the grave is called שׁאול because it demands the body back. I also saw a suggestion that שׁאול is called this because it is never satisfied and always asks for more (i.e., more dead people to absorb.)
But the most likely suggestion is that שׁאול derives from the root שׁـאـה and that the final ל is not part of the root. The root שׁـאـה has meanings like “loud noise,” “crash into ruins,” and “desolation.” Although the first two of these meanings do not fit, “desolation” can be seen as a main aspect of שׁאול. It is viewed as desolate of material objects, or at least desolate of comforting material objects. At Isaiah 14:11, it is implied that when one lies down there, one lies on top of maggots and one is covered with worms—i.e., there is nothing to lie down upon there, and no blankets to cover oneself.
Other examples of words with a final ל that is not a root letter include: ערפל, כרמל and שמאל. It is, of course, ironic that scholars have made extensive efforts inquiring about the meaning of the word שׁאול.
On a homiletical level, and in the spirit of Yom Kippur, perhaps, שׁאול is called this to remind us that we are all on “borrowed time” and that we should use our time on earth wisely!
While still on earth, Mitchell First can be reached at [email protected]. He also asks מחילה from all his readers. (As to the origin of the root מחל, he has written a long article on this in “Esther Unmasked,” an article that was published earlier in Hakirah, volume 18 and is available online.)
