Skip to content

shebanq
ubs

ארר ʾārar – to curse

Semantic Fields: Cursing   
Author(s): James K. Aitken
First published: 2024-10-10
Citation: James K. Aitken, ארר ʾārar – to curse,
               Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Database (sahd-online.com), 2024

Introduction

Grammatical Type: verb qal, niphal, piel, hiphil (?), hophal (?)

Occurrences: 63x HB (41/20/2); 0x Sir; 37x Qum; 10?x inscr. (Total: 109/110).

  • Torah – qal: Gen 3:14, 17; 4:1; 9:25; 12:3; 27:29 (2x); 49:7; Exod 22:27; Num 22:6 (3x), 12; 23:7; 24:9 (2x); Deut 27:15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26; 28:16 (2x), 17, 18, 19 (2x)
  • Torah – piel: Gen 5:29; Num 5:18, 19, 22, 24 (2x), 27;
  • Nebiim – qal: Josh 6:26; 9:23; Judg 5:23 (3x); 21:18; 1 Sam 14:24, 28; 26:19; 2 Kgs 9:34; Jer 11:13; 17:5; 20:14, 15; 48:10 (2x); Mal 1:14; 2:2 (2x);
  • Nebiim – niphal: Mal 3:9;
  • Ketubim – qal: Ps 119:21; Job 3:8;
  • Qumran: see Aitken, The Semantics of Blessing and Cursing, 64;
  • Inscriptions: see Aitken, The Semantics of Blessing and Cursing, 64.

7. Conclusion

A.1 Comparative languages do not provide much evidence for the semantics of ארר. Its rarity in other languages (some NWSem evidence, Akk, Socr, Tigre) indicates its distinctiveness in Hebrew, and prevents any inference from a hypothetical root. It should not be thought to have an underlying idea of ‘binding’, which is derived from a doubtful interpretation of the Akk cognate.

A.2 In inscriptions ארר is only found in Judean ones from between 700 and 500 BC, and no cognate is found in inscriptions of any other language. The only association of the verb with God is found where the divine name יהוה appears in close succession (D-4.401, D-20.002), but even then the instances are not certain. But these might suggest a corrective to the older view of Hebrew curses (e.g., Pedersen) that they merely concerned the transfer of soul power and had no direct connection with the deity. This does not, however, mean that they were imprecations. The defining semantic element is not whether or not curses are tied to God (which is not always the case), but in what way they were thought to be operative. In the case of the inscriptions the verb functions as a prohibition, perhaps as a threat or some form of apotropaic power.

A.3 Apart from inscriptions its distribution in the literature suggests a specialised use. It is frequent in covenantal contexts, including Qumran, and rare elsewhere. It is very rarely attested in Wisdom literature.

A.4 It seems likely that the verb ארר denoted the imposition of something evil, be it a ban or more generally the prevention of an action. It is most often found in the past participle form as a declarative.

A.5 The declarative use of אָרוּר may denote some sort of threat or prohibition (especially in inscriptions), and connected with this is the specific formulaic use in convenantal treaties. In the latter cases it need not be precative, but a description of the state conditional upon fulfilling of the laws.

A.6 ארר can denote the declaring of someone to be in a negative condition, or the wish or expectation that they will be, whether the speaker is God or a human.

A.7 In a few cases ארר might denote little more than speaking ill of someone.

A.8 In Qumran a particular use of ארר to denote warding off demons has developed, but it is closely related to the use of אָרוּר in prohibitions.

For this entry, see further James K. Aitken, The Semantics of Blessing and Cursing in Ancient Hebrew (2007), 64-84 (Printed publications).

Semantics of Ancient Hebrew Database