4QExod-Levf 2 ii 12 ]yrcmm Mt)cl plicating plus.^912
Q227 MT Exod 40:17 Nk#mh SV(1) – The MT lacks the object
4QExod-Levf 2 ii 13 Nk#mh t) marker.^913
Q228 MT Exod 40:18 Nk#mh t) h#m Mqyw SV(2) – The phrase is lacking in
4QExod-Levf 2 ii 13 omits 4QExod-Levf.^914
Q229 MT Exod 40:18 omits SV(2) – The phrase is lacking in
4QExod-Levf 2 ii the MT.^915
13-14
]ysrq t)Q230 MT Exod 40:19 Ntyw OV(l) – Possible difference in
912
4QExod-Levf clarifies the period being discussed as Myrcmm Mt)cl tyn#h hn#b, “in the second year after
their going out from Egypt.” The additional material in 4QExod-Levf is also found in the SP and is re-
flected in the LXX: τω δευτερω ετει εκπορευομενων αυτων εξ Αιγυπτου, “in the second year after their go-
ing out of Egypt.” 913
The object marker appears marking the object of a passive verb frequently in the MT: with Niph‘al
verbs some 32 times, 10 times with Hoph‘al, and only once with Pu‘al (Jer 50:20). See E. Ulrich and F.M.
Cross, 914 Qumran Cave 4. VII, 142, and B.K. Waltke and M. O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 384-85.
The phrase in the MT appears to be lacking in 4QExod-Levf. The restored phrase in E. Ulrich and F.M.
Cross, Qumran Cave 4. VII, 142, is wynd) t) Mqyw, however there does not seem to be any necessity for the
verb to be restored √Mwq rather than √Ntn. If the latter is restored the reading in 4QExod-Levf simply lacks
the first phrase. Alternatively, with the verb restored as √Mwq, one may assume a variant textual tradition
that has √Mwq in place of √Ntn in the MT. From this 4QExod-Levf has suffered haplography losing the text
between the first occurrence of the verb √Mwq to the second. Of the two phrases, Nk#mh (t)) h#m Mqy, “ and
Moses raised up the tabernacle,” and wwynd) t) Ntnyw, “and he set its base,” 4QExod-Levf seems to lack the
first while the LXX seems to lack the second. 915
The MT reads: wy#rq t) M#yw, “and he placed its boards.” 4QExod-Levf has an extended phrase, re-
stored: wy#rq t)w wysrq t) M#yw, “and he placed its hooks and its boards.” The listed items involved in the
tabernacle’s construction may have been harmonised in 4QExod-Levf with other such lists, e.g. Exod 35:11
and 39:33. Alternatively the textual tradition behind the MT may have suffered haplography and omitted
the object marker and the noun √srq. Against the latter the same haplography would have to underlie the
textual traditions behind the SP and the LXX, and also those that are represented by the Tgs. and the
Peshitta, as the noun is lacking in all of the other witnesses. Therefore harmonisation in 4QExod-Levf is the
most likely explanation.