A Babylonian Jewish Aramaic Magical Book PDF
A Babylonian Jewish Aramaic Magical Book PDF
A Babylonian Jewish Aramaic Magical Book PDF
Ginzei Qedem
Genizah Research Annual
Volume
10
2014
Editor
Y. Zvi Stampfer
Editorial board:
Menachem Ben-Sasson (Hebrew University), Haggai Ben-Sammai (Hebrew University), Robert
Brody (Hebrew University), Y. Zvi Stampfer (Hebrew University and Ben-Zvi Istitute, Jerusalem)
Cover illustration:
Ms. CUL T-S 16.378; reproduced here with the permission of the Syndics of
Cambridge University Library
Printed in Israel
Ginzei Qedem is produced by the Ben-Zvi Institute of Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi and the
Hebrew University of Jerusalem on behalf of the Friedberg Genizah Project.
All rights reserved to the Friedberg Genizah Project.
A joint venture between the Jewish Manuscript Preservation Society and the
Friedberg Genizah Project
ISSN 1565-7353
Table of Contents
English Section
Editorial Statement
7*
9*
45*
English Summaries
98*
Hebrew Section
Documents from Afghanistan in the National Library of Israel
Ofir Haim
29
93
129
157
Book Review
Remains of Halakhic Responsa in the Cairo Geniza
Abraham David
193
Editorial Statement
We are pleased to present the tenth volume of Ginzei Qedem, an annual
publication devoted to Genizah texts and studies. The term Genizah here
functions as a collective noun for the Genizot around the world, and the
current volume demonstrates the broad variety of the genre and its
research. An article on the documents of the newly discovered Afghanistan
Genizah is included here, together with texts from the recently
re-discovered Damascus Genizah as well as new texts from the well-known
Cairo Genizah.
The diversity of the Genizah research is displayed in this volume as
well, as it represents many fields, including Biblical studies and exegesis,
Halakha, liturgy, history, magic, and more.
Ginzei Qedems purpose is to provide a specialized venue for the field
of Genizah research, in the hope that research on and publication of
Genizah texts will, in time, enrich both traditional and academic Jewish
studies, as well as Islamic ones.
Genizah research has made great strides in the last decade, mainly
with the establishment of the Friedberg Genizah Project, of which
Ginzei-Qedem is one branch. As part of the effort to serve our readers, the
electronic edition of Ginzei Qedem will be assimilated in the FGP website
and will be synchronized with the images and the bibliographic data of the
FGP database.
Contributions to Ginzei Qedem may be in Hebrew or English. Any
substantial quotations in a language other than that in which the article is
9*
For the Damascus Genizah, see the excellent study by C. Bandt and A. Rattmann,
Die Damaskusreise Bruno Violets 1900/1901 zur Erforschung der Qubbet elChazne, Codices Manuscripti 76/77 (2011): 120.
For the Christian fragments, see Bandt and Rattmann, esp. pp. 1820; for the Jewish
ones, see ibid., p. 20. See also A. Ashur, A Ketubbah in the Palestinian Style with the
Permission of Matzliah Gaon, from the Damascus Genizah, Peamim 135 (2013):
16370 (Heb.).
Ginzei
Qedem
10
(2014)
10*
elsewhere), good black and white images of some of these fragments have
survived in several different collections. 3
For the circumstances under which they were taken, see Bandt and Rattmann, pp.
910, 12, 16, and 18.
We are extremely grateful to Amir Ashur and especially to Ronny Vollandt, who is
now cataloguing the Damascus fragments in Berlin, for bringing these texts to our
attention. We are also grateful to Christoph Rauch for the photographs and for the
permission to publish them here, to Cordula Bandt for sharing with us other
photographs of the Damascus Genizah fragments, and to Judith Olszowy-Schlanger
for her palaeographical advice. Dr. James Nathan Ford read the manuscript and
proposed many helpful readings and interpretations, as well as granting us permission
to cite from magic bowls that that he is preparing for publication (cited as JNF).
Professor Shaul Shaked aided us with the Persian material and similarly granted us
permission to cite from his work on the Martin Schyen collection (cited as MS).
Unfortunately, the Arabic numerals on the margins of the folios bear no clear relation
to the folios original order. For the circumstances under which these numerals were
added to the original folios see Bandt and Rattmann, p. 13 and Plates 7 and 8. The
same is true of the small etiquettes with sequential numberings which were placed
next to each folio while the pictures were taken, which also bear no relation to the
original order of the folios.
continuous stretch of text is found in our folios 57, where the spell that
begins in 5b continues into 6a, 6b, 7a, and 7b, ending at the bottom of 7b.
Similarly, there is a clear textual continuity from 1b to 2a and then to 2b,
and from 3a to 3b and to 4a and 4b. On the other hand, some text is
probably missing before 1a, there seems to be a break between 2b and 3a,
and the continuity between 4b and 5a is far from certain. In such cases, one
may either try to re-order the folios in a way that would leave fewer gaps or
assume, as we do, that more folios are still missing in these places,
especially before 1a and between 2b and 3a. How long the original booklet
was we cannot say, nor can we reconstruct the structure of its quires, as
even its bifolia were dismembered before they were photographed.
One additional factor complicating the reconstruction and interpretation
of this set of magical texts is that only three of the recipes bear clear titles:
( for love) in 2b:7, ( lit., for sending a fire, i.e., for
aggressive magic) in 3a:3, and ( for [appearing before] a governor)
in 5a:4. In all other cases, no titles are provided, and it often is unclear
where one recipe ends and the next begins. Unfortunately, the punctuation
marks used by the scribe do not seem to mark the beginnings or ends of the
magical recipes in any consistent manner or to separate the spells from the
ritual instructions that explain how to employ them. These difficulties are
compounded by the fact that a single textual unit may cover more than one
magical aim; for example, the long text that begins in folio 5b sets off
without any title or explanation (the previous recipe was for [appearing
before] a governor and ended at the bottom of 5a) and includes a long
spell for what is usually known as opening the heart, i.e., memorizing the
words of the Torah and the Talmud. But then, in 6b:5, we find the
connecting word , furthermore, followed by a long spell for
protection against all types of demons, and in 7a:5 we move without any
apparent break to a second anti-demonic spell, which begins with
, sealed and counter-sealed, and runs to 7b:6. Only then is the user
instructed to recite this adjuration on three (consecutive?) Fridays before
11*
12*
dusk, to immerse himself in water, and to fast and abstain from sexual
intercourse during these three Fridays. Thus, it seems that the ritual
instructions were applied to a set of three adjurations, one of which was
intended for the memorization of Torah and the other two for protection
against demons. 6 Such mixtures might be due to copying errors or
deliberate editorial activities taken by our scribe or by one of his
predecessors, and they certainly reflect the recipes complex transmission
history and contribute to the difficulties inherent in interpreting magic spell
texts.
Another feature of these recipes, which also reflects their long
transmission history, is that whereas the spells to be recited or inscribed are
consistently given in Aramaic, the ritual instructions are sometimes given
in Aramaic (e.g., 3a:53b:4 and 7b:711), but in other cases are given in
Arabic, here written in a phonetic manner that is also typical of the earliest
Judaeo-Arabic fragments from the Cairo Genizah (e.g., 5a:14). 7 This is an
example of a phenomenon that is well attested in both Jewish and nonJewish magical recipe books, namely, that when the society using these
recipes switches from one language of communication to another (in this
case, from Aramaic to Arabic), its spell-mongers often continue
transmitting the spells to be recited or inscribed in the old language, even
though it is no longer fully understood, but gradually translate the practical
instructions into the new vernacular. 8 In this respect, our booklet is a clear
6
As both the ritual instructions and the first of the three spells bear some resemblance
to the Sar Torah rituals of the Hekhalot literature, it is likely that the anti-demonic
spells are a later addition to whatever the original recipe may have contained.
For the pre-Saadian methods of writing Judaeo-Arabic, see J. Blau and S. Hopkins,
On Early Judaeo-Arabic Orthography, Zeitschrift fr arabische Linguistik 12
(1984): 927 and more recently J. Blau and S. Hopkins, On Aramaic Vocabulary in
Early Judaeo-Arabic Texts Written in Phonetic Spelling, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic
and Islam 32 (2006): 43371.
For this phenomenon, see further discussion in G. Bohak, Ancient Jewish Magic: A
History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 220.
See, for example, T-S K1.143, published in J. Naveh and S. Shaked, Magic Spells and
Formulae: Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1993),
Geniza 18.
13*
14*
recipe book whose recipes are not embedded into any literary structure
and display no thematic unity should make a major contribution to the
study of this branch of the Jewish magical tradition. This is all the more
important since this branch more or less died out in a subsequent period, as
may be seen from the very few parallels between the incantation bowls and
the magical recipes from the Cairo Genizah (or from non-Genizah Jewish
manuscripts, including Oriental ones). 10 In this respect, we may note that
our recipes too find very few close parallels among the published and
unpublished magical texts from the Cairo Genizah and that when such
parallels emerge, they are found in Cairo Genizah recipe books which
display some telltale signs of the Babylonian Jewish origin of at least some
of their recipes (see our notes to 2b:46 and 5a:4-7).
One final feature of our booklet that may be highlighted here is that
while the structure of the individual recipes is not always clear, in many
cases the incantations, including long stretches of voces magicae, seem to
precede the ritual instructions, which often are quite short. In this respect,
these recipes seem to differ from most magical recipes from the Cairo
Genizah, which usually provide the ritual instructions first and then cite the
incantations that are to be inscribed or recited. Whether this is a mere
coincidence or a more typical feature of Babylonian Jewish magic is an
issue that will have to be dealt with elsewhere, and only after more such
texts are discovered and analyzed. 11
10
For these parallels, see especially D. Levene and G. Bohak, Divorcing Lilith: From
the Babylonian Incantation Bowls to the Cairo Genizah, Journal of Jewish Studies 63
(2012): 197217. Two more parallels will be discussed in a forthcoming publication
by James Nathan Ford, but given the availability of hundreds of Genizah fragments
and hundreds of bowls, such parallels clearly are the exception rather than the rule.
11
We note, for example, the occurrence of this phenomenon in the magical recipes of
T-S Misc. 34.22, which displays many other signs of its Babylonian Jewish
provenance (and cf. below, n. 84). The instructions similarly follow the incantations in
Mandaic spells. See M. Morgenstern and T. Alfia, Arabic Magic Texts in Mandaic
Script: A Forgotten Chapter in Near-Eastern Magic, in R. Voigt (ed.), Durch Dein
15*
Wort ward jegliches Ding! /Through Thy Word All Things Were Made! II.
Mandistische und Samaritanistische Tagung / 2nd International Conference of
Mandaic and Samaritan Studies (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2013), 16379, at 164,
where it is noted that the same order is employed in Demotic magic texts.
12
13
14
15
16*
17F
17
18
On the latter, see M. Morgenstern, Linguistic Features of the Texts in this Volume,
in S. Shaked, J. N. Ford, and S. Bhayro, Aramaic Bowl Spells, Jewish Babylonian
Aramaic Bowls, vol. 1 (Brill: Leiden, 2013), 4243.
19
On this form in the Jewish Babylonian magic bowl corpus, see Juusola, Linguistic
Peculiarities, 2069.
, I kill (3b:89), also showing the exclusively Babylonian tensemarker ;20 , that I release (4a:9). 2 f.s. in qlyt pattern: ][,
19F
you shall ru[n], (2a:5). , you shall fly and fall, (2a:6). 21
20F
bis).
24
23F
20
See also , I turn (X) into (Y) (4a:1). Note that in both cases, is
written as a separate particle, as is common in the better Babylonian manuscripts. See
Morgenstern, Studies, 17274.
21
2 f.s. participles in the qlyt pattern have been previously found in JBA in the magic
bowl corpus. See Morgenstern, Linguistic Features, 45.
22
23
24
Ibid.
25
17*
18*
-ti affix for 1 c.s. perfect of III-yod verbs: , I conjure (5b:8), the
so-called Onkelos/Jonathan form. 28
27F
{}
Dittography
Our translation and commentary here are kept deliberately brief and
aim to provide support for the interpretation of the text presented herein.
As the question marks between parentheses in the translation indicate,
many passages remain obscure.
26
27
28
Folio 1a
1
31
30F
I went up
0
30
the mountains,
3
F29
32
31F
'
][
'
33
[ ]
F32
29
Professor Shaul Shaked has suggested to us that bryng dywh looks like an Iranian
word, but no such word exists in this form. One may think of *brng external or a
similar emendation. Such a word is unknown as the name of a demon, but is at least a
plausible designation for a demon.
30
The following historiola bears a strong resemblance to similar passages in the magic
bowl corpus and Mandaic formularies, e.g., lura -nirig silqit ldaura rba -bit hiia
akaita lmihla pt bil alaha ulmia br uma hiuara, I ascended to the mount of Nirig,
and to the great abode of the House of Life; I found Salt, daughter of the god Bel, and
Oil, son of white sesame (Zarazta -Hibil Ziua, ed. De Morgan 265/20: 4043).
31
32
For this meaning of see M. Kahana, The Importance of Dwelling in the Land of
Israel According to the Deuteronomy Mekhilta, Tarbi 62 (1993) 50114, at 507
(Heb.).
19*
20*
'
[ ]
Amen Sela.
ZWY
35
34F
and mustard . . .
36
34
'
F3
35F
Folio 1b
1
33
'
37
] [ ' '
34
Lege: .
35
Muql azraq, i.e., bdellium; see E. Lev and Z. Amar, Practical Materia Medica of the
Medieval Eastern Mediterranean According to the Cairo Genizah (Leiden: Brill,
2007), 111.
36
37
Here used in a figurative manner; the same usage is found in Mandaic: mta hurak
unidalia qumtak uniqum zarnuqak ulanitikbi, extend your staff that your stature be
raised up and your pipe be erected and not brought down (DC 12: 5960). For a
similar use in Palestinian Jewish Aramaic, note the use of the Greek loan word
(tube, pipe) for the male organ, on which see S. Krauss, Griechische und lateinische
Lehnwrter im Talmud, Midrasch und Targum (2 vols.; Berlin, 189899; repr.,
LPLYWS
5
38
precious
6
' '
00
39
40
39F
41
40F
contentious women
Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1964) 1:383, and G. Bohak, The Magical Rotuli from the
Cairo Genizah, in G. Bohak, Y. Harari, and S. Shaked. eds., Continuity and
Innovation in the Magical Tradition (Jerusalem Studies in Religion and Culture, 15;
Leiden: Brill, 2011), 32140, at 333. , bucket, is also used as a euphemism for
the source of fecundity in a wedding poem in Jewish Palestinian Aramaic:
, may your bucket not be lacking and may you be told good
(tidings), published in M. Sokoloff and J. Yahalom, Jewish Palestinian Aramaic
Poetry From Late Antiquity (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Science, 1999), 258, text
44*:8 (in Hebrew).
38
39
Cf. Sokoloff, DJBA, p. 674: = butter. The text could also mean oil
boiled with jasmine.
40
41
21*
22*
43
F42
'''
45
4F
46
45F
'
second (day)
Folio 2a
1
47
[ ]
F46
'
00
42
43
44
45
Since is a transitive verb bearing the 1 c.s. object suffix (n < -ni; contrast the
following verbs , let them say, and , let them hear, without the final
n), we should similarly understand as representing a minor scribal error for
, let them give to eat.
46
47
The reading of the last two words is uncertain, and their meaning is unclear.
49
Anpharid,
5
F48
50
50 F
51
52
][
51F
53
48
49
50
51
For the qlyt pattern of the 2 f.s. participles, see the linguistic introduction.
52
53
23*
24*
7
8
the clouds
][
54F
][
56
F5
57
F 56
'
54
is paralleled in two of the bowls from the British Museum, 001A:10 and
002A:12 (J. B. Segal, Catalogue of the Aramaic and Mandaic Incantation Bowls in
the British Museum [London: British Museum Press, 2000], 4344):
, and they sent and injured her from clouds of hail.
55
Lit: they call them; is an impersonal 3 pl. participle of the Onkelos type. For the
naming of demons, compare
, They call you the blinder, the smiter, the sightless;
they call you the lame one, the scabeous, the crawler (MS 1927/8:7, in S. Shaked, J.
N. Ford, and S. Bhayro, Aramaic Bowl Spells, Jewish Babylonian Aramaic Volume 1
[Leiden: Brill, 2013], 56, with some alterations to the translation).
56
Lege: .
57
For this formula, cf. the bowl (IM 9736) republished by Ortal-Paz Saar, An
Incantation Bowl for Sowing Discord, Journal of Semitic Studies 58 (2013): 24156,
at 242, l. 7: , overturned are Bel and Abel and Nabu
and Borsip. For the reemergence of the old Mesopotamian gods in Aramaic and
Mandaic texts, see C. Mller-Kessler and K. Kessler, Sptbabylonische Gottheiten in
sptantiken mandischen Texten, Zeitschrift fr Assyriologie 89 (1999): 6587; D.
Levene and G. Bohak, A Babylonian Jewish Aramaic Incantation Bowl with a List of
Deities and Toponyms, Jewish Studies Quarterly 19 (2012): 5672.
Folio 2b
1
'
corpse,
4
58
F57
'
59
NN flutter after
58F
0 ' '
59F
61
F60
58
For binding the text to a bird and letting it fly, see also the Genizah fragment Mosseri
Ia. 26.2, copied by Abraham ibn Yiju (probably during his stay in Aden) and
published in S. D. Goitein and Mordechai Akiva Friedman, India Book III: Abraham
ben Yij, India Trader and Manufacturer (Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi, 2010) (Heb.), 421,
][ , and bind the amulet to the leg of a bird and
let it fly, (but in a recipe to cause a person to be exiled from his community). See
also R. Campbell Thompson, The Folklore of Mossoul, Proceedings of the Society
of Biblical Archaeology 1906, 7686, 97109; 1907, 16574, 28288, 32331; 1908,
3033, no. 23.
59
For the double meaning of , which cannot be rendered into English, see the
frequent appearance of in the Babylonian Talmud, as well as
'( '' ''T-S K 1.37, published in P. Schfer and S. Shaked, eds.,
Magische Texte aus der Kairoer Geniza I [Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994], no. 4).
60
Or LY N LY HW.
61
Cf. the angels in the Horvat Rimmon erotic spell and its many parallels,
for which see Naveh-Shaked, Amulets and Magic Bowls, A10 (p. 84) and esp. Joseph
Naveh and Shaul Shaked, Magic Spells and Formulae: Aramaic Incantations of Late
Antiquity, Jerusalem: Magnes, 1993, G22, 1/9 (pp. 216, 219).
25*
26*
'
come after NN
'
62
61F
(??)
Folio 3a
1
] of flax,
and bury
2
][
bank
3
00
RH DYG??
4
..
66
..
[ ]
65
F 64
...
62
Compare in Mandaic: rir daiib upum ptia, his saliva is dripping and his mouth is
open (DC 43E:8 // DC 20: 18-20). DC 43 here provides the better reading but was
erroneously read in C. Mller-Kessler, A Mandaic Incantation against an
Anonymous Dew Causing Fright (Drower Collection 20 and its variant 43 E), Aram
22 (2010): 45357, at 460.
63
The words here look like voces magicae, but one would expect instructions such as
Take mud, fashion a figurine, etc.
64
Presumably the text is referring to the production of a voodoo doll, writing on its
forehead, sticking needles in it, etc.
' '
' '
Folio 3b
1
] [
(one) to right
2
67
] [
68
67 F
'
][00 '
BWKN
5
a lion I ride
6
71
72
71F
70
F69
places of infant(s),
65
Here and in the next two lines there is a hole in the parchment that was clearly present
before the scribe began writing his text.
66
For , note that in early Babylonian manuscripts the form of the demonstrative
pronoun is , hyi. See Morag, Some Notes, 667 (Hebrew).
67
Here and in the next line, = . Compare Th. Nldeke, Compendious Syriac
Grammar (London: Williams and Norgate, 1904), 21.
68
69
It is unclear whether this was once a coherent text or was always magic words.
27*
28*
children; I
9
Folio 4a
1
74
73F
{ashes}, barley
75
F 74
70
There is a hole in the parchment, here and in the next line, that was clearly present
before the scribe began writing his text.
71
72
73
For this section, see Shaked, Ford, and Bhayro, Aramaic Bowl Spells, 202, and
additional parallels in M. Morgenstern and M. Schlter, A Mandaic Amulet on
Lead, Martin Schyen Collection MS 2087/1 Eretz Israel, (Joseph Naveh Memorial
volume), forthcoming.
74
is a phonetic spelling of .
75
Dittography?
76
76F
7F
79
F78
'
it with pitch
6
with my heels
7
79 F
81
F80
a green lizard
'
Folio 4b
1 seven times in a reed tube and bury
' '
00
WHWDYH
77
78
On the Babylonian forms and , both derived from the root ", see
Morgenstern, Studies, 6668.
79
Lege: ?
80
81
There is a hole in the parchment, which was probably there before the scribe began
writing his text.
29*
30*
82
'
F 81
him, NN
'
84
0
F83
'][ ''
Folio 5a
1
' ' ] [
82
83
This may be the same as b. abb. 140b (Sokoloff, DJBA, 192), the meaning of
which remains unknown.
84
This spell has a partial parallel in T-S Misc. 34.22 (a fragment whose magical recipes
display a strong Babylonian influence): ?
. / ? ?? / ??
''/ , (For) sending fire: NH
skull, N skull, KM WHNM KM WHNM N WHNM NH WHNM, I adjure you
and I conjure? you .D RWM, the evil satan who sits over three hundred and sixty
satans, go down and bring down fire on NN, etc.
85
The meaning of "in this context is uncertain. It could mean to dance, flutter (see
Sokoloff, A Syriac Lexicon, 1485), or perhaps to tremble (denominative of ,
DJBA 1077).
86
F 85
slaughter/cook
3
4
6
7
F 86
[ ]
00
00
88
'
'
87
F87
90
89
F8
??? amulet(?)
8
00
Folio 5b
1
[ ]
91
' ''
87
Lege: ?
88
89
There is a hole, or some other irregularity in the parchment, that was clearly there
before the scribe began writing his text.
90
Note a somewhat similar recipe in Bod. Heb. e 74.21 (a folio from the same
manuscript as the two fragments published by Schfer and Shaked, Magische Texte
III, no. 69, which display a Babylonian vocalization): ' :
, to be saved from a
time of trouble, say three times over a knot of hay LGT LGM SKR BLM and place it
behind your ear.
91
31*
32*
F 92
THPGYH
7
93F
93
QQP HH WH YH
5
95
F94
conjure
9
Bowls in the Istanbul and Baghdad Museums, Archiv Orientln 6 [1934]: 31934, at
321).
92
93
For the following set of voces magicae, note a similar sequence in MS New York
Public Library 190 (olim Sassoon 56), p. 77, lines 79:
/ ''' / , and
by this great, precious, and holy name, H(oly), H(oly), H(oly), P (=WH in atbash)
QH WHWH Holy PPWTMY QTNYH Holy QTR NQSSH NSPRH.
94
95
There is a hole, or some other irregularity in the parchment, that was clearly there
before the scribe began writing his text.
96
Folio 6a
1
'
foolishness
3
99
[''' ]
open
4
100
9F
102
10F
[ ]
101
F10
97
98
Lit.: his.
99
If the text is not corrupt (lege: , as in the previous line?), then we have here a
rare example of the root "used in a Babylonian text. This spell is in general very
conservative in its language.
100
This expression apparently refers to the six orders of classical rabbinic literature,
though the use of , columns, in this context is unusual.
101
Lege: .
102
The use of the correlative pronoun with participle is regarded as characteristic of the
Palestinian transmission of rabbinic Hebrew. See M. Bar-Asher, Mishnaic Hebrew:
An Introductory Survey, Hebrew Studies 40 (1999): 11551, at 132.
33*
34*
Folio 6b
1
104
103F
at once.
105
104F
103
F102
delay
2
H WH WH HW HY KYN HYHYH
YH WH YH HH YH YHW
][
'
F105
106
Folio 7a
1
'
103
Lege: , or perhaps .
104
105
106
HW HH HYW HW
4
HH HY YH WH WHW HH YH
YH YHW HY forever.
]
][
F106
107
][
108
107F
before me,
107
Lege: ?
108
109
This list of demons finds ample parallels in the bowls. For the number sixty-six, cf.,
e.g., , In the name of
idqiyyah who is the chief of sixty-six angels who are appointed over her blood
(Moussaeiff 155:10, published in Levene, Corpus, 111) or
, by the signet ring of Solomon son
of David, the king of Israel, by which are sealed three hundred and sixty six demons
(VA 3854:1518, published in D. Levene, Heal O Israel: A Pair of Duplicate Magic
Bowls from the Pergamon Museum in Berlin, Journal of Jewish Studies 54 [2003]:
10421, at 105).
35*
36*
Folio 7b
1
110
109F
HY HH HW HH
4
YH HY HH WH HY HW HH WH
114
13F
M.
F12
' '
115
F1
113
14F
112
This adjuration.
7
YH HH HH YW HW HH WH WH
6
F10
111
110
On the apocopated form of the 3 m.p. perfect see Morgenstern, Studies, 18689 (with
previous literature).
111
112
Lege: ?
113
Lege: ?
114
The sequence WYHH KYN might be construed as garbled Aramaic, but note a similar
sequence in 6b:3.
115
of the Friday,
10
'
Fridays,
11
37*
38*
12345 6 78910
Folio 1a
Folio 1b
39*
12345 6 78910
Folio 2a
Folio 2b
40*
12345 6 78910
Folio 3a
Folio 3b
Folio 4b
12345 6 78910
Folio 4a
41*
42*
12345 6 78910
Folio 5a
Folio 5b
Folio 6b
12345 6 78910
Folio 6a
43*
44*
12345 6 78910
Folio 7a
Folio 7b