Matthew J. Lynch, «Neglected Physical Dimensions of “Shame” Terminology in the Hebrew Bible», Vol. 91 (2010) 499-517
Psychological and social paradigms have dominated translations and interpretations of shame terminology in the Hebrew Bible. Scholars often adopt modern notions of shame as either internal feelings of worthlessness or external social sanction, and then apply those notions to the biblical text. I suggest that there is need to reevaluate whether or not such psychological and social frames are appropriate to biblical terminology of shame. My essay contends that shame terms, such as #$wb, Mlk, and their cognates and synonyms, frequently denote the experience of 'diminishment' or 'harm' in ways far more physical than typically reflected in modern renderings.
503
NEGLECTED PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS “ SHAME â€
OF
that all Judah was mourning, and that the “outcry†of Jerusalem, as
a collective entity, was ascending upward. Vv. 3-6 then offer
focused illustrations of that mourning and outcry in the lives of
nobles, servants, farmers, does and wild donkeys 14 : “the four
pictures in vv. 3-6 spell out in a vivid way the content of v. 2.
Humankind and the animal world share the awful consequences of
a severe drought†15. No sphere of life was left untouched by the
deadly event.
Fourth, this scene connects vwb and μlk to acts of mourning,
whose primary aim, as David Lambert argues convincingly, was to
express loss. In particular, the experience of pain and suffering
created an almost inexorable drive to display associated losses on
the “canvas†of one’s body, making public the severity of one’s
condition. One outcome (purposeful or not) of this public display
was that it often elicited pity from a God whose eyes were drawn
toward the weak and afflicted. This contrasts radically with modern
psychological notions of “shame†as something that one fights to
keep hidden. Mourning moves in an opposite and explicitly public
direction. It is a display of desperation that cares nothing for social
and psychological shame, as suggested by the frequent willingness
of mourners to display their bodily emaciation despite the
revulsion of human onlookers 16. This comports with the desperate
behaviors of all the actors in this scene. Just as humans displayed
their state of distress through mourning behaviors, so the ground
and animals display their plight. Though not “intentionalâ€, even
the actions of the wild donkey and doe in vv. 5-6 serve this basic
expressive function. In other words, this passage maintains a fairly
narrow focus on displaying and voicing the physical effects of the
drought through mourning behaviors.
For example, in v. 2 Judah “mourns†17, the gates “languishâ€
and “waste awayâ€, while the people sit on the ground in mourning
On the structural unity of 14,2-6 see LUNDBOM, Jeremiah 1-20, 693-
14
6 9 4 ; W.L. HOLLADAY , J e r e m i a h 1, 423; R.P. CARROLL , J e r e m i a h . A
Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia, PA 1986) 309.
CARROLL, Jeremiah, 309.
15
D. LAMBERT, “Fasting as a Penitential Rite: A Biblical Phenomenon?â€
16
HTR 96 (2003) 477-512 (479, 485-490). Lambert’s comments refer primarily
to fasting, which is one significant form of mourning rituals. Notice that Jer
14,12 refers to the Judean’s “fastâ€.
As LUNDBOM, Jeremiah 1-20, 696, rightly states, this is a “cry of
17