The Book of Jonah

 

I. GETTING STARTED

 

            The monitor’s screen of my computer hovered in front of me. I looked at it lugubriously. Somehow, I did not know where to start. Although the Book of Jonah comprises only four chapters, it gives rise to quite a few conceptual issues. These are discussed thoroughly and in detail by Jack M. Sasson’s Jonah (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven & London, 2010). But I knew that very few readers would have the patience to read this treatise from cover to cover. Most people would skim  through the original or simply rely on the mention of Jonah by a pastor or other religious exponent. A need for a simplified topical treatment was desirable.  The difficulty was that any treatment of the subject would look pale and shallow in comparison with this leading tome.

            I was about to switch off my computer and give up my attempt to deal with the subject, when Theophil appeared, seated next to me. As often before, he assumed the friendly guise of my late friend Peppi (into whose London antiques shop I stumbled many years ago) – not the form known to humanity, that is, the image of Satan or the Archfiend as familiar to the leading monotheistic religions and treated as fiend by believers. To me, though, he had shown kindness and consideration. For years, I have come to regard him a friend.

            “What brings you here, Maestro?” I wanted to know.

            “Your decision to give a miss to an analysis of the Book of Jonah [‘Jonah’]. A declaration of defeat is, in my opinion, premature. I decided to reveal myself to encourage you to persevere. You had many struggles during your long life and, in the ultimate, came out victorious.”

            “With your help, Maestro. Religious sages are entitled to take their negative view of you. I feel free to differ.”

            “I am touched,” he replied. “But the simple truth is that I have nudged you, and many others, when I concluded that it was time to do so. The final act was carried out by the person nudged.”

            “But don’t you think that my notion of tackling Jonah is misguided? How on earth can I compete with Sasson’s tome?”

            “You can’t, Peter’le. He had the luxury of spending years on this book in the course of his employment. And he had tools unavailable to you. But, as you have already realised, his encyclopaedic analysis has remained a closed book to people not engaged in the field. A relatively short discussion of Jonah written for the benefit of ordinary readers has remained topical. Why not give it a try?”

            “But even a concise article requires references. And I am too old and tired to start composing footnotes. Worse still, Sasson’s book includes a detailed bibliography of works dealing with Jonah. I don’t have the time, or even the wish, to read all of them.”

            “If you decided to write an article, you would have to familiarise yourself with all major writings. You did so when you dealt with legal topics during your academic career. As a retiree, this type of work is best avoided. But then, why not use another form of writing?”

            “Such as?” I asked bewildered.

            “A discussion with another interested, non-professional, party: a dialogue. Such a form will enable you to cover the essential issues. You could use a less formal tone and simply concentrate on points you consider crucial.”

            “But how to find such a counterparty: an open-minded person, who would be willing to discuss the relevant issues without assuming a preconceived dogmatic stand? A Rabbi or a professional historian would, I believe, fall into this group. And a lay person may not be prepared to make the effort.”

            “It may, indeed, be difficult to find an acceptable human counterparty. Still, I like to please my friends.”

            “Would you really come to my aid in such a manner? And how about your general unwillingness to disclose secret information commanded by you?”

            “You are, of course right, Peter’le. I have authentic knowledge concerning the writing of Jonah. This information will have to remain out of bounds. But I can weigh your arguments and assess them and your insights.”

            “That is good of you, Maestro. Well, when can we start?”

            “Right away, Peter’le. Let us begin by spelling out the aspects to be covered by you.”

“These can be summarised neatly. First and foremost, I want to discuss the message of the book. Jonah is sandwiched amongst other prophets in a tome entitled ‘The Minor Prophets’. The message of the other prophets is clear: they prophecy or, in other words, predict the future events of the Israelites or other nations. Most of them ask the people to repent.  Others foretell the disaster or the punishment to be meted out to the sinful. Jonah is, in my opinion, a parable with a message based on the events discussed in the four chapters of this succinct book.”

“Hold on for a moment, Peter’le. It seems to me that prior to concentrating on the message of the book you have to spell out the narrative. Many people think of it as the story of the chap swallowed by a whale or large fish. You need to set the record straight. Also, there is a preliminary point. Sasson and others have debated at length whether the text that has come down to us is the original, or a version revised many times by different hands. Further, some argue that parts of the text, especially chapter 2, are late additions.”

“The discussion of the narrative is, of course, essential. As regards the preliminary point, the answer is simple and straightforward.  We deal solely with the text available to us. Whether this has gone through different editorial processes over generations is the domain of professional commentators. Our orientation differs. We know that passages of Jonah were discovered amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. Moreover, the finds include a scroll of the Minor Prophets, which confirms that Jonah was already included. On this basis we can conclude that Jonah was known during the first century BCE. This book, as is, is our topic. We may refer to translations of the book as an aid to ascertain the meaning of a passage or sentence of the Hebrew text. But I see no need to deal exclusively with such works.”

“Well spoken,” confirmed Theophil. “For the ordinary man of our times, versions other than the work we possess are irrelevant. What he needs to understand is the text read out in religious functions. This comprises the four chapters set out in the Old Testament.”

“So, we have to spell out the narrative. This is our first point. The second is an elaboration of the message or messages implicit in the book.”

“Hold on,” stepped in Theophil.  “This enquiry is bound to entail a consideration of the relevant background.”

“Should our second point be a discussion of the time and place of the composition of the work?”

“I think so, Peter’le. The message of any tome must take into consideration the environment or social circumstances prevailing when a book was composed. For instance, would you not have to discuss European society of the early 20^th century prior to analysing the works of Kafka or of  Erich Maria Remarque?”

“Point taken,” I agreed readily. “It follows that our second enquiry is of a historical nature. We must consider the nature of the society which the writer had in mind and whose members were meant to be his audience. Accordingly, our order is: (i) Jonah’s narrative, (ii) its background (covering the time and place of its composition) and (iii) the message or messages. This leads us to our last and final point: (iv) what does the book stand for in our own period.”

“Agreed,” affirmed Theophil, with a warm smile spreading over his face. “Well, let us start. You will, of course, have to cite passages of Jonah. The original is in Hebrew, but you are writing in English. Which translation will you use?”

“The standard set out in the Koren publication. It is neutral.”

 

II. THE NARRATIVE

“The book commences with God’s order to Jonah, the son [ben] of Amitai, to march to Nineveh – ‘the Great town’ – and ‘cry against it’ because its wickedness had come to His attention. Far from obeying this order, Jonah seeks to flee to Tarshish.”

“Where is Tarshish?”

“We cannot be certain about the exact location. It is, at the same time, clear that Tarshish is located to the West of Palestine whilst Nineveh is to its East.  Jonah seeks to travel in the opposite direction.”

“Which means that he tries to distance himself from the place to which he was directed to proceed,” observed Theophil. “Jonah’s intention to rebel is beyond doubt.” 

 “It is,” I approbated. “So, Jonah ‘goes down’ [descends] to the port of Yafo [Jaffa], boards a ship sailing to his destination and pays the required fare. God thereupon hurls a massive wind which causes a tempest. To prevent the ship from capsizing, the sailors jettison all articles, and each prays to his own deity. Jonah does not join them but goes down to the aft of the ship and falls asleep. He is woken up by the ‘shipmaster’ [captain], who asks him to pray to his own God, with the hope that God will listen, will think of them and so they will not perish.”

“So, Peter’le, Jonah takes things easy. Notwithstanding the storm and the impending doom, he goes aft and slumbers. The captain wakes him up and requests him to pray to his own God. Well, carry on.”

 “As the storm continues, the sailors decide to cast lots to ascertain who is the cause of the disaster. When Jonah is caught, he reveals that his attempt to flee is the cause of the catastrophe and advises the sailors to throw him  overboard. Initially, they try to row back to land but the storm gains strength. Thereupon, they cast Jonah into the sea whereupon the tempest abates.  Recognising Jehovah’s might, the sailors make sacrifices to him and take vows.”

“What happens to Jonah?”

“He is swallowed by a large fish tasked by God. On his third day in the fish’s belly, Jonah prays to God.”

“A prayer for help?” asked Theophil.

“Not really. He avers that in adversity he remembers Jehovah and fixes his eyes on His temple. He then thanks God for deliverance and undertakes to carry out his vows.”

“Does he make any whilst in the belly of the fish?”

“Not expressly. Contextually, though, he would appear to vow to carry out God’s commands.”

“Does he then repent? Does he regret his rebellion and his attempt to escape?”

“He does not. It is a thanksgiving prayer rather than a call for help. Further, it differs in style from the rest of the book, which is expressed in neat and concise prose: it is poetic.”

“I assume you will come back to this later. Please continue to narrate the story.”

“At God’s instruction, the fish ‘vomits’ Jonah onto land.”

“Does the narrator describe where?”

 “He does not. He tells us that, once again, Jehovah instructs Jonah to proceed to Nineveh and deliver his message. This time Jonah obeys. He proceeds to Nineveh and predicts that it will be ‘overturned’ [destroyed] in forty days.”

“Does he ask the inhabitants to repent? And how long is his sermon?”

“No, Maestro. Jonah does not preach repentance. In his short message, he just predicts doom. However, the people of Nineveh, its king and noblemen repent, fast and discontinue their evil ways. Thereupon, God reconsiders his stand, has mercy and does not destroy the city.”

“Does this outcome please Jonah?”

“It does not. He is aggrieved and, in a fresh prayer (expressed in prose), explains that he knew all along that God was merciful and forgiving, and that for that very reason he, Jonah, sought to flee to Tarshish. He then asks God to take his soul because he prefers death to his life.”

“But is this not a strange stand, Peter’le? Most prophets would have been pleased when people repented and mended their ways.”

“Undoubtedly. But prophets like Hoshea, Isiah and Jeremiah castigated their own people: the Hebrews. In Jonah, God accepts the repentance of gentiles – the fierce Assyrians – and shows his mercy even to them. Whilst Nahum and even Amos predicted that God was going to punish Israel’s enemies, Jonah shows that God’s mercy, like God himself, is universal.”

“Is this the traditional stand of Judaism, Peter’le?”

“The consensus amongst scholars is to regard Jehovah as tribal – the God of the Hebrews. Ezra and Nehemiah, in particular, are adamant. The Hebrews (or Jews) must keep apart from other people. Leaders of the Jews returning from the Babylonian exile   even rejected the gentiles’ offers for help in the construction of the second (post exilic) temple. Jonah’s emphasis on the universality of God is innovative, perhaps even unorthodox.”

“You really analyse the message of the Book of Jonah, Peter’le. We’ll come back to it later. Currently let us continue our discussion of the narrative.”

“Jonah erects a shelter for himself east of the town and waits to see what would take place. God gives rise to a plant – called Kikayon – which shelters Jonah from the sun. Jonah is pleased with the shade it provides. On the very next day, a worm, tasked by God, attacks the Kikayon, which thereupon withers. God then triggers a fierce dry east wind. Jonah, who is exposed to it and to the sun, faints and, once again, wishes to be dead. God thereupon asks Jonah whether he is vexed on account of the Kikayon. Jonah affirms that he is ‘vexed to death’.”

“What is a Kikayon?” asked my counterparty.

“The word is not used in any other Biblical Book. It is unique: a hapax legomena. It is understood to refer to a castor oil plant or some sort of a weed.”

“I assume the meaning of the word was clear when the book was written. Well, please continue.”

  “God points out that Jonah is concerned for the Kikayon, for which he did not labour and which appeared one night and perished on the very next day. He then asks rhetorically: ‘Should I [then] not be concerned for Nineveh, the great city, in which are more than hundred and twenty thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also much cattle.’ The narrative concludes on this note.”

“An abrupt ending,” augmented Theophil.

“If the object of the book was to narrate the story of Jonah, this would, indeed, be a strange ending. But I believe that the object of the author was to convey a message!”

“Let us, then, turn to it; but before discerning it, we ought to consider the historical background of the book.”

 

III. JONAH’S BACKGROUND

1. When was the Book of Jonah Composed

            “Let us start by considering the likely date of Jonah’s composition. We know it is attributed to Jonah the son of [ben] Amitai. A prophet of this name is mentioned in Kings II 14:25, during the reign of Jeroboam II in the 8^th century BCE. Well, Peter’le what can you tell me about this epoch?”

            “The very same Biblical Passage advises that Jonah predicted the attainment of this mighty King, who ‘restored the boundaries of Israel from Lebo-Hamat [in the North] to the Seas of Araba [in the South]’. This would have been the result of wars with Aram-Damascus – the traditional Northern enemy – and probably an expansion leading to dominion over Moab and Edom in the South. The Kingdom of Judah might have become a vassal; but there is no archaeological evidence to this effect.”

            “Be this as it may: Jeroboam II would appear to have been a mighty King,” observed Theophil.

            “I believe he was. Assyria was in decline during this period, due mainly to internal strife. It became the major player in the entire Fertile Crescent (including Palestine) some fifty years later.”

            “From what you tell me, Jonah ben Amitai was a prophet who predicted victories. There is no record of his having asked any people to repent. Well, were there any other prophets who did?”

            “Isaiah did; but his ministry related mainly to the Kingdom of Judah. Hoshea called for repentance in the Northern Kingdom Israel. Another prophet, active in Israel during period – Amos – castigated the Northern Kingdom for its sinfulness and asked that they mend their ways. So, we have to accept that Jonah differs: he predicts doom to a gentile Kingdom but is not critical of the Hebrew population of this period. Moreover, why would any prophet of the epoch turn his attention to Assyria?”

            “You have made your point,” approbated Theophil. “What do we know about Assyria of the 8^th century BCE? And what do we know about Nineveh?”

            “At that time, Assyria’s capital was Kahlu (Nimrud). Nineveh was an important administrative and religious centre, but its governor was an official, not a king. Nineveh  was constituted capital only when Sennacherib came into full power in 705 BCE. During the period of Jeroboam’s reign, Nineveh was an important city but not a national centre of Assyria.”

            “What do we know about its size and population?”

            “It was a large city but its description, in Jonah, as ‘an exceeding great city of three days journey in extent’ is an exaggeration! So is the suggestion that its population was ‘more than one hundred thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand’. The number of its inhabitants during that period would have been about forty thousand.”

            “From what you relate, Peter’le, Jonah does not appear to be a tome written during the 8^th century BCE. When was it composed?”

            “The consensus among scholars it that it was written during the post exilic, Persian period, either in the 5^th or the early 4^th century BCE.”

            “On what basis have they reached this conclusion?”

            “The style of the book is late, post exilic, Hebrew. It also includes many words loaned from Persian and Aramaic. One gets the feeling that the anonymous author filled gaps in his Hebrew vocabulary by resorting to loan words. These may constitute Hapaxes but were, of course, understood by readers. The word yitashet [יתעשת][to mind] in chapter 1, illustrates the point. Its root is Aramaic; not Hebrew.”

            “How about the word Kikayon?”

            “Borrowed from Akadian, which was the Levant’s lingua franca during the 2^nd millennium BCE. It was replaced by Aramaic after the collapse of the Bronze Age. During the 8^th century BCE Aramaic was prominent. The fact that the author knew Akkadian, suggests that he was a scholar.”

            “Are there any other clues supporting a 5^th century authorship?”

            “I can think of five: (i) by then Assyria  had ceased to be a world power; (ii) the author’s familiarity with polytheistic religions and their believers, (iii) his nuanced conversation with the sailors, (iv)  the author’s familiarity with nautical concepts, and  (v) Jonah’s prayer.”

            “Let us consider them one after the other, Peter’le.”

            “Very well. First, during the 5^th century BCE Assyria and Nineveh were no longer a political power. The Kingdom was defeated, and Nineveh was destroyed in 612 BCE. But its memory lingered although details respecting it were unclear. This explains its description in Jonah.”

            “I agree,” said Theophil. “Well, turn to the next, second, point.”

            “The author’s familiarity with polytheism is clear. He narrates that  each sailor calls on his own divinity for help. Notably, he does not state expressly that all these deities are powerless. Jonah displays a very tolerant approach to alien creeds.   Orthodox Judaism of the 5^th century BCE would have sneered at them and at the sailors’ prayers. Moreover, when the sailors recognise Jehovah’s might, they make offerings and take vows to him. But there is no hint that they convert and abandon their own faith. And the author does not castigate them!”

            “Point taken,” approbated Theophil. “Let us turn to the third.”

            “Jonah, the sailors and the captain converse naturally. Such an approach was more common in the 5^th century BCE than earlier on. It is also notable that the sailors’ initial reaction is to save Jonah. They throw him overboard only after their attempts to row back are thwarted by the storm.”

            “This does not strike me as a strong clue. Jews had to mix with gentiles even during earlier periods. Still, the point is noteworthy, especially the positive depiction of the sailors.”

            “The fourth argument, concerning the author’s familiarity with sea going vessels, is more directly in point. During the 8^th century BCE – the glorious reign of Jeroboam II – sea- goings were controlled by the Phoenicians. Jaffa was a regular port of calling. At a first glance this supports composition during the 8^th century BCE. On closer examination, though, it supports the later date. During the 8^th century, a fugitive like Jonah might have proceeded to Tyre or Sidon.  During the 5^th century BCE, Jaffa was the natural place for embarking on a sea voyage and the author’s familiarity with concepts such as jettisoning strikes me as far more common during later than earlier periods.”

            “Here, too, you can argue both ways. Seafaring and familiarity with problems arising during a sea voyage  might have been just as familiar in the 8^th as in the 5^th century BCE.”

            “I have to agree with you,” I muttered. “The last point, though, is telling. In his prayer from the belly of the fish, Jonah refers twice to ‘your holy temple’. This temple, though, was in Jerusalem: in the Davidian Kingdom. Notably, the prophet Amos, who was active in the Northern Kingdom in the 8^th century BCE, was chased away and told to ‘escape’ to Juda and prophecy there; not in the Northern Kingdom.  Jonah, who predicted Jeroboam’s victories, was most unlikely to refer to the Jerusalem temple. In contrast, any 5^th century Jew would have regarded the second, rebuilt, shrine as essential to his faith.”

            “This is an important clue,” agreed Theophi. “Further, the prayer’s style is a clear indication. It is composed almost entirely of lines and motifs taken from the Psalms. Psalms 18, 42, 69, 120 and 130 are directly in point. And the hymns known to us were chanted in the second temple during the 5^th century BCE.”

            “Some Psalms are attributed to king David, whose rein took place in the 10^th century BCE. Still, in the form that has come down to us they were part of the second temple’s ritual,” I agreed. “So, we have clear supporting evidence.”

            “Very well, then, Peter’le.  You conclude that Jonah was composed in the 5^th century BCE. This is slightly later than the date of Malachi. If Jonah were treated as falling within the Judges section of the Old Testament, it should have been placed at the very end of it. Instead, it is grouped together with another eleven books as one of the Minor Prophets. Does this make sense?”

            “Not if you treat it analytically. But the Old Testament – as we know it today – was not sealed until about the 2^nd century CE. Jonah was not discussed in the Jamina [Javneh] Synod of 90 CE. Its place amongst the Minor Prophets was established by then. As already mentioned, a scroll of these prophets, discovered in Qumran (the location of the Dead Seas Scrolls community), includes scraps of Jonah. Its inclusion amongst the Minor Prophets was thus secured prior to the 70 CE, when this sect was destroyed by the Romans.”

            “This leads me to the last question we ought to raise: was Jonah composed prior to Job? Scholarly consensus is that this book too was written in the 5^th or very early in the 4^th century.”

            “We cannot be certain, Maestro.  Our records of this period are scanty. As you know, I believe that Job was composed by a Diaspora Jew. But even if Jonah and Job were composed in the same period, I am pretty certain that the author of Jonah was not familiar with Job.”

            “Why, Peter’le?”

            “Job deals with but one issue, namely theodicy, or in other words: why do the innocent suffer. This issue arises also in Jonah. If the ship had capsized, the harmless sailors would have perished together with the rebellious Jonah, just as Job’s innocent sons and daughters perish although he alone is put to the test. If the author of Jonah had been familiar with Job, this theodicy issue would have been either discussed or, in the very least, mentioned.”

            “And it is not,” summed up Theophil. “This leads to an interesting question: why was the author of Job unfamiliar with Jonah and vice versa? You say they were virtually contemporaneous. Well, mon cher, Pierre?”

            “They may have been composed in different places. Further, even if they were composed in the same locality the authors might have moved in separate circles. The low rate of literacy suggests neither was widely circulated at that time.”

“Well, you have made your point. Let us turn to the next, quite related question.”

 

2. Where was the Book of Jonah Composed

 

            “On this issue too scholars are divided,” I pointed out.  “Many aver that Jonah was composed in Jerusalem. There is no doubt that, during the entire post exilic period (including the Persian period), Jerusalem was the centre of Judaism. Indeed, Diaspore Jews travelled to Jehud frequently, especially during the High Holidays. Nevertheless, I am convinced that Jonah was composed in the Diaspora.”

            “But what do we know about the Jewish Diaspora of that period?”

            “We are told in Kings I 20:34 that Ahab, who reigned the Northern Israeli Kingdom during the first half of the 9^th century BCE, was granted ‘marketplaces’ in Damascus.  Further, Jeremiah [41:5] mentions that people from Northern Provinces came to Jerusalem to express sympathy in 586 BCE [after its fall]. This indicates that a Diaspora was already in existence at that time.”

            “Any other places?” asked Theophil.

            “Esther (composed during the 5^th century BCE) establishes the existence of a large Jewish population in many countries ruled by Persia. Jews are described in this book as a nation dispersed throughout the empire. This shows that important Jewish Diaspora communities existed at that time.  Some of the largest were in Babylon and Susa.”

            “How about Egypt, Peter’le? It is common knowledge that during the 5^th century BCE the Persian Empire included Egypt.”

            “Jewish settlements existed in Egypt and actually are even mentioned in Isaiah, who tells us that ‘five cities in the land of Egypt [shall] speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.’ Am just quoting.”

            “City of Destruction?” Theophil sounded bewildered.

            “Modern scholarship suggests that this strange phrase is the result of a scribal error. The Hebrew text reads ‘Ir Haheres’, which does mean ‘city of destruction’. Scholars read it as ‘Ir Haĥeres’ which means ‘city of the sun’. This may actually refer to  Elephantine (Yeb; near the very Southern border, currently Aswan ), where Diaspora Jews even founded a temple to God, who may be described as ‘sun’, bearing in mind the ‘Ra’ was the Egyptian sun-God.”

            “But Peter’le, the passage you cite comes from the prophecies of Isiah the son of Amoz, who was active during the 8^th century BCE.”

            “True, Maestro. But Isiah was revised during the post exilic, Persian, period, which covers the 5^th century BCE. The passage I cited was, I believe, inserted at that time.”

            “Do you suggest, on this basis, that Jonah was composed in Elephantine?”

“This is only a hunch. The reference may be to On (Heliopolis) which had an Egyptian temple of the sun-God, Ra. This city, in the delta, was still in existence, though in decline, during the 5^th BCE. And it had a Jewish settlement. Still, archaeological findings confirm that a  Jewish settlement existed  in Elephantine. And there is yet a further supporting clue: in his prayer from the belly of the fish,  Jonah says: ‘the weeds were wrapped about my head.”

“Why is that relevant?”

“The Hebrew original refers to ‘suf’ [soof], which actually means ‘reeds’ and not ‘weeds’. Well, reeds are common on the shore of the Nile but not in the sea. And Elephantine was right on the Nile Shore.”

“And on the basis of these clues you are inclined to think that Jonah was composed there?”

“Let me emphasise again: this is a mere hunch. Still, Elephantine was not cut off. Travel down the Nile was common in those days.”

“Very well. And this takes us back to the main issue. Peter’le, why do you argue that Jonah was composed in a Diaspora settlement?”

“First, we have authentic negative information about Jerusalem. It will be recalled that it was sparsely populated and a backwater. Nehemiah tells us that priests escaped from it due to poverty.”

“All the same, the Temple in Jerusalem was the very centre of Judaism. And many of the priests officiating there were well trained scribes.”

“True, Maestro; but the city was desolate, with a population of just about 1,500. According to modern scholarship, the walls of the city were still in ruin; they were rebuilt only during the Hasmonaim period. Moreover, the orientation of the Temple Priesthood was narrow – separatist by nature.”

“Why did they adopt such a policy, Peter’le?”

 “You will recall that the people of the Northern Kingdom, exiled by the Assyrian Empire, mixed with the local population and were ‘lost’ to Judaism. The policy of Jerusalem establishment – segregation – sought to safeguard against such an outcome. They wanted to ensure that Judaism would continue to exist and remain intact.”

“And Jonah?”

 “The book’s outlook militated against it. It is far more cosmopolitan.”

“But isn’t it possible that some of these priests in Jerusalem took a similar view?”

“Wouldn’t their writings have been suppressed by the majority? Even if Jonah had been composed there, it would have been most unlikely to find its way into the Old Testament.”

“Again, you are jumping the gun, Peter’le: you deal with the message. This will be discussed later. At this point, let us sum up by saying that Jonah’s orientation is incompatible with the conventional outlook of the priesthood in Jerusalem. Do you have any other, separate arguments, that suggest a Diaspora composition?”

“A tentative one. The excellence of the Jewish Diaspora in Babylon, which included the population exiled by Nebuchadnezzar in 597 BCE (when King Jehoiachin surrendered) and  586 BCE (after the fall of Jerusalem). It included the intelligentsia. Giants, like the prophet Ezekiel, settled there.”

“Do you, then, aver that Jonah was composed there?” asked Theophil.

“Jonah’s author might, indeed, have lived there. If Jonah was composed in a place other than Jerusalem, Babylon would be the most likely venue. But, as already mentioned, my hunch is that the book was composed by a scholar from Elephantine.”

“But why not from Babylon?”

“The Babylon community’s outlook was similar the establishment’s in Jerusalem. A divergent view was more likely to be voiced elsewhere, for instance Elephantine. But, as already said, this is just a hunch. And Maestro: ought I to suppress a mere supposition?”

“Most certainly not. Hunches often lead to progress. Eons ago, one of your remote ancestors, who warmed himself by sitting in the vicinity of a fire lit by lightning, felt the impulse to use a burning branch to ignite by its use a small fire in his icy cold cave. I nudged him to proceed! This was one the first major steps taken by homo sapiens, eventually leading to the emergence of civilisations. On many occasions a hunch is meaningful. As long as you do not assert is as a valid and fully proved conclusion, you are entitled to voice it.”

“Thanks for this confirmation, Maestro. Let us then proceed to the gamut of my discourse: Jonah’s message.

 

 

IV. JONAH’S MESSAGE

“Before we discuss it, Peter’le, there is a preliminary point to consider. Do other Minor Prophets deliver a message?”

“They do. Amos, for instance, criticises the opulence – the ostentatiousness – of upper-class society during the reign of Jeroboam II; Hoshea castigates the people’s failure to obey God’s commands and their wayward ways; Nahum tells us that sinful Nineveh will be punished.”

“So, in this regard they do not differ from Jonah, whose message we are going to consider. Or do they?

“I believe they do, Maestro. The message of prophets other than Jonah emerges from their sermons or prophecies. Jonah differs: the message is derived from the narrative; not from the prophet’s mouth. And it deals with the very nature of God. Unlike all other prophetic tomes, Jonah is a parable.”

“Why then is Jonah not placed in the last section of the Old Testament: The Scriptures (Ketuvim)?”

“An historical accident or, perhaps, an attempt to ensure that it would not be assailed. Contextually, it should have been placed beside other wisdom tomes, such as Job and Ecclesiastes.”

“Alright, let us then turn to the message. How is it spelt out?”  

“The author is articulate. He presents two points of view or conceptual approaches. One is Jonah’s. It typifies the restrictive theology of Esra and Nehemiah, who treat Jehovah as the God of the Jews.  They preach segregation. In a sense, their outlook is echoed in Jonah’s decision to escape God. On the one hand, he knows that Jehovah has created the entire world. On the other hand, he believes that Judah is special to him, so that by running away he distances himself from God’s call.”

“Surely, Peter’le, Jonah must have known that God’s word can be heard anywhere. God addressed Moses, Ezekiel and Jeremiah in places other than Judah.”

“He should have known. All the same, he thinks that by sailing to Tarshish, he will manage to escape his vocation. He means to thwart God’s call. The sea tempest proves him wrong.”

“And what is the other point of view? And whose is it?”

“The other point of view emphasises God’s universality.  Being the creator of everything, repentance and God’s mercy are available to everybody, including the fierce and destructive Assyrian. When they pray to God and mend their evil ways, God forgives them, has mercy on them and does not destroy them.”

“Does Jonah come down in favour of one of these incompatible approaches?”

“The tome does.  It prefers the latter approach, which sounds loud and clear in the rhetorical question, cited earlier on. Jehovah tells Jonah that repentance and God’s mercy are not confined to the Jewish community. God is universal.”

“Point taken,” said Theophil. “To comprehend the implication of Jonah’s message and outlook let us have a closer look at the manner it describes gentiles.”

“The sailors are described in a very positive and humane manner. When Jonah tells them that his escapade is the cause of the storm, they voice their displeasure by asking Jonah: ‘What have you done’. They would appear to have realised the inconsistence between Jonah belief that Jehovah created the entire world and his attempt to flee.”

“Are they outraged when the realise that Jonah has jeopardised the safety of themselves and the entire ship? Do they wish to take revenge?”

 “Far from it. They try to raw back to land, where Jonah would have disembarked. They try to save both themselves as well as him. And they ask God to save them from spilling blood. It is only when their salvage efforts fail, that they throw Jonah overboard.”

“And Peter’le, how about Nineveh? Is its description negative?”

“It is not. When Jonah predicts imminent doom, the King and population repent and declare a fast. And they ‘believe in God’.”

“Would you say that Jonah outlook is compatible with Ezra’s and Nehemiah’s?”

“It is not. Ezra and Nehemiah preach segregation. And Nehemiah’s description of gentile leaders and politicians is hostile. He tells us that when the Jews sought to restore the city’s fortifications, they had to arm themselves so as to repel disruptive attacks of gentiles.”

“Which approach was common?”

“The official approach in Jehud was that of Ezra and Nehemiah: segregation. It is most clearly stated, at a much earlier period, when Balaam describes the Hebrews as ‘a nation that dwells apart’ [Num. 23:9]. In the Diaspora Jews had to coexist with Gentiles and mix with them. Intermarriage was acceptable, especially in Elephantine. This tolerant attitude is embraced by Jonah’s author.”

“I thought, Peter’le, that mixed marriages were common even in Judah and later on in Jehud? For instance, Samson married a Philistine girl and in Ruth Boaz marries a Moabite woman. Also, Nehemiah refers to such marriages and Esther married a Persian king.”

“True, Maestro; but such marriages were accepted grudgingly. Obviously, Nehemiah disapproves; Samson’s parents wonder why he does not marry a local girl; and in Esther we are told that she ‘was taken’ to the king’s harem. Still, there is no hint that the Jews in Susa disapproved of the match. So here we witness the rather tolerant approach prevailing in the Diaspora.”

“What you really say, Peter’le, is that the Diaspora’s easy-going ‘live and let live’ philosophy is embraced in both books.”

“Quite so. You will recall that this is one ground for my belief that Jonah was composed in the Diaspora.”

“I do, Peter’le. Does this difference in approach affect conversion policies?”

“It does. In his prayer from the belly of the fish, Jonah says that those ‘that guard lying vanities forsake their loyalties.’ This implies that conversion to belief in Jehovah entails abandonment of other deities.”

“Is this the current stand of Judaism?”

“It is, Maestro. Orthodox Judaism discourages conversion. To be accepted into the fold, a would be convert has to follow given rituals, including circumcision in the case of males. But Jonah’s approach is far less rigid. The sailors make sacrifices and take vows to Jehovah without first discarding their own deities. And Nineveh’s repentance triggers His mercy although it is not suggested that they converted. Further, King II 17:24-34 advises that gentiles exiled to Palestine worshipped both their own gods and Jehova.”

“Was conversion freely available?”

“I think it was. Ruth’s declaration that she accepts Naomi’s God, viz. Jehova, constitutes conversion. Similarly, Esther [8;17] tells us that many people throughout the Persian Empire ‘became Jews.’ Something akin to ‘an act of faith’ was the only requisite. And people did not have to discard their traditional deities.”

“Any other aspects of the message you consider relevant, Peter’le?”

“Just one. In his prayer Jonah tells us that in his adversity he remembered Jehova. There is here an indictment of those, who recall God’s capacity to help them, when they face a calamity.”

“Am glad you spotted this point.  Religion thrives when mankind encounters a crisis. A slang expression tells the story. It is: Fox Hole religion.  In periods of peace places of worship become empty. Well, why don’t you sum up the message conveyed by Jonah.”

“The book emphasises the universality of God and his mercy. Redemption is available to people other than Jews.”

“Is this message echoed in other Biblical books?”

“It is. Job discussed the theodicy issue but all principal character (except Elihu) are gentiles. Quohelet (Ecclesiastes) tells us that ‘all’ is vanity, and Ruth and Esther indicate that God’s faith can be embraced universally and that conversion is straightforward.”

“What then is special about Jonah?”

“It is a polemic. Quite apart from preaching God’s universality it ridicules the doctrinal approach of Ezra and Nehemiah. Jonah – the prophet – typifies this stand. The book exposes the futility of his rebellion and challenges his philosophy.”

“Why then did the book survive? Why was it not supressed or excluded from the canon?”

“I suspect that this was due to its attribution to a prophet referred to in Kings II. And Maestro, our analysis supports my argument that the book was composed in the Diaspora.”

“Please explain.”

“The great historian, Josephus Flavius, relates that 2^nd Temple Judaism comprised three

parties, or schools of thought: Pharisees, Zadokites and Essenes. The existence of other, smaller sects, in Jehud and later in Judah cannot be ruled out. Neither his The Jewish War (known as The War of the Jews and the Romans) nor Antiquities of the Jews refers to the Qumran sect, which existed during his period (the 1^st century CE).  And he may also have left out other small and exclusive sects. But, of course, his discussion is confined to the political landscape in Palestine. He did not deal with Diaspora Judaism.”

“Is there any source about such sects?”

“We do not have accounts made in the 5^th century BCE. Later, during the first half of the 1^st century CE, Philo of Alexandria describes an ascetic Jewish group, the Therapeutae, living just outside Alexandria. Philo presents them as a Diaspora counterpart to the Essenes – models of spiritual discipline and philosophical devotion.”

“But Peter’le, why is  this group relevant? They are discussed  in a tome written long after the composition of Jonah.”

“True. Still, Philo describes them as being of antiquity. But this not the main point. It is quite possible that other sects, or schools of thought, existed in the Diaspora, even if not mentioned in existing records.”

“Can you think of any location?”

“Once again, I have to come back to my hunch respecting Elephantine. We know that this community had its own temple. It was destroyed during unrests in 410 BCE. After obtaining approval, inter alia, from the establishment in Jerusalem, it was rebuilt on a smaller scale and without an altar in 407 or 404. Basically, this means that it became a synagogue. There is evidence of its existence during the next century.”

“I hear you. But why, then, is it relevant?”

“The community in Elephantine had a liberal outlook and mixed with the local population. A sect opposed to the Jehud rigidity might have thrived there. But, of course, we cannot be certain. There was correspondence between Elephantine and Jerusalem. But the trip was lengthy: it took up to four to six or even weeks.”

“By land or sea? Give me some details, please.”

“Sea was the gentler master. One drifted down the Nile to Heraklion or Naucratis,   then along the  Mediterranean coast  to Jaffa, and onwards overland to Jerusalem. The period I mentioned, takes into account waiting time. A land route by caravans was also available.”

“So Elephantine was not cut off Jerusalem. Still, the trip was lengthy. You, Peter’le, weave a tempting thread. But let us keep the loom visible.”

“Maestro, I am aware that this militates against my hunch. this can be argued against my hunch. Still, I do take the view that Jonah, which I believe was composed in the Diaspora, challenges the doctrine of segregation voiced by Ezra and Nehemiah and adopted by the community in Babylon. Members of the Elephantine community might have taken such a stance.”

“They might, Peter’le. But would their voice be heard in Jerusalem?”

“We cannot be certain. Still, distance does not mean isolation. Despite the lengthy trip, Elephantine was threaded into the fabric of Persian-era Jewish life. Their voice, I believe, was not silenced by their remoteness from Jehud.”

  

 

V. JONAH’S RELEVANCE  TODAY        

 

“This has been a lengthy discussion,” observed Theophil. “Jonah can be given diverse construction. But is the book still relevant in your own – supposedly enlightened – era?”

“I believe it is, Maestro. You see, Jonah preaches tolerance. It sneers at ‘holy cows’ (like prophets) and, by implication, at conventional wisdom.”

“But Peter’le,  isn’t this notion predicated in modern literature?”

“It is – perhaps even ad nauseam. But Jonah tells us that dissenting voices were raised even in antiquity. This is important.”

“Any other point?”

“There is, Maestro. Jonah shows that the universality of God is compatible with enlightened Judaism and has been preached even before the inception of Christianiy.”

“Should modern Man appreciate this?”

“I think he should. You see, Maestro, Quohelet tells us that everything has already happened. This is a sobering thought. It is good to know that many of our liberal premises can be traced back to antiquity.”

“Well, Peter’le, does your average well-read person know this? For instance, is attention drawn to the book in modern Jewish communities?”

“Up to a point. In contemporary Jewish practice, Jonah is read publicly on Yom Kippur afternoon. The liturgy focuses on Nineveh’s repentance as a model for moral renewal, while largely setting aside the book’s deeper challenge to exclusivist theology. Modern usage highlights one layer of Jonah – repentance – while leaving its polemical stance quietly in the wings.”

“But then, Peter’le, why do worshipers fail to appreciate Jonah’s polemical nature?

“Most congregants do not understand Hebrew, Maestro, and by the time Jonah is read out, fatigue settles in. The subtleties of the text glide past them like birds over still water.”

“So, this is the position respecting Jews. How about Christianity and Islam?”

“God’s universality and the room for repentance are preached in both. Jonah is often mentioned in sermons and addresses.”

“Is there also a mention of the polemical nature of the book?”

“There isn’t. As mentioned at the outset, Jonah is generally known just as ‘the fellow swallowed by a large fish or whale’. I hope to enlighten people who read these pages.”   

“I see. Well, Peter’le, you have made your point. And your arguments are sound. But it is getting late. You must be tired.”

“I am.”

“Then you better retire,” said Theophil and vanished.

All that was left to me was to step into my bedroom, get to bed and switch off the lights. .