617 Arama, Isaac ben Moses
2 : 5 states that the family included 775 descend-
ants, while Neh 7 : 10 declares that it included only
652 and 1 Esd 5 : 10 specifies 756 (see Wright
2004 : 301–4).
Nehemiah claims that a certain Arah had a son,
Shecaniah, who was the father-in-law of Tobiah,
one of Judah’s archenemies who with Sanballat and
Geshem had attempted to thwart the building of
Jerusalem’s wall. That Shecaniah’s father is the
same Arah in Ezra 2 : 5; Neh 7 : 10 and 1 Esd 5 : 10
is possible.
2. Son of Ulla
A figure named Arah, son of Ulla, is also mentioned
in 1 Chr 7 : 39 in the list of Asher’s descendants
(1 Chr 7 : 30–40).
Bibliography: ■ J. L. Wright, Rebuilding Identity (BZAW 348;
Berlin/New York 2004).
Jacob L. Wright
Arair
/Aroer, Aroerite
Aram (Person)
Aram (MT A  rām; LXX Αραμ) appears incontestably
for the first time in the annals of Tiglath-Pileser I
(1116–1076 BCE) referring to a group of defeated
people. It may also appear on a statue base from
the Theban funerary temple of Amenhotep III with
a “man” rather than “country” determinative.
1. Son of Shem
In the Table of Nations of Gen 10, Aram is the final
son of Shem (v. 22). His named descendents are Uz,
Hul, Gether, and Mash (vv. 21–23). In contrast,
Aram’s descendents are attributed directly to Shem
in 1 Chr 1 : 17–18. OT pseudepigrapha mention
Aram as the ancestor of Tamar (Gen 38) who lived
in Mesopotamia (T. Jud. 10 : 1, also Jub. 41 : 1). This
ancestry sets her in opposition to Judah’s Canaanite
wife (named Saba, daughter of Barsaba the king of
Adullam, according to T. Jud. 8). By attributing
Tamar’s ancestry to a son of Shem rather than Ca-
naan, these texts distance the treasured descend-
ents of Judah from intermixing with the Canaan-
ite “other.”
2. Son of Kemuel
In the genealogy of Abraham’s brother Nahor, Na-
hor’s son Kemuel is identified as father of Aram
(MT Gen 22 : 21), though Septuagint has “the Syri-
ans” (Συρων), interpreting the name as gentilic.
Scholars generally identify this Aram as Aram son
of Shem while maintaining that this genealogy is
more ancient than that of Gen 10. Because Israel
and Aram were enemies beginning in the 9th cen-
Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception vol. 2
© Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, 2009
Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception 2 (© Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York 2009)
618
tury BCE, Israel would only want to consider such
a close familial relationship with Aram before hos-
tilities commenced. Furthermore, unlike the Gen
10 genealogy, this list does not consider Aram as
the ancestor of a great nation (like the sons of Shem
in general), which suggests that the Gen 22 geneal-
ogy emerged before Aram became a major political
power as evidenced in the annals of Tiglath-
Pileser I.
A midrashic haggadah details how Aram and
his brother Rechob left Haran, going on to found
the city Pethor in a valley by the Euphrates (named
after Aram’s son), which was later known as Aram-
Naharaim (Book of Yasher 22 : 22, 27–28). This Pet-
hor is identified as the home of Balaam son of Beor
(Num 22 : 5; Deut 23 : 5).
Another Aram, son of Zoba, son of Terah, is
mentioned in this context in the Book of Yasher as
becoming a wealthy man who founds the city
Aram-Zoba. This Aram appears again in conjunc-
tion with the genealogy of the children of Jacob
(Book of Yasher 22 : 30–39; 45 : 21).
3. Son of Shemer
Aram, as son of Shemer, is mentioned in a list of
clan leaders of the Asherites (1 Chr 7 : 34).
4. Son of Hezron
In the genealogy of Jesus, Matt 1 : 3–4 names Aram
as descendent of Perez and ancestor of Boaz. Con-
versely Ruth 4 : 19 and 1 Chr 2 : 9–10 list the name
“Ram” in this section of the genealogy (Ram also
occurs with reference to other individuals in Job
32 : 2 and 1 Chr 2 : 24–26). The Matthean genealogy
has likely substituted the more well-known
“Aram” for Ram in this case. Luke 3 : 33 has Arni
(Αρνι). This “Aram,” or Ram, appears in numerous
depictions of the ancestors of Jesus portrayed ac-
cording to the genealogy of the Gospel of Matthew
including the Cathedral Church of Christ in Can-
terbury (name inscribed as “Aran”), the Lausanne
Cathedral, as well as illustrated manuscripts of
Matthew.
Bibliography: ■ P.-E. Dion, Les Araméens à l’Âge du Fer (Paris
1997) 15–19. ■ P. Haupt, “Die Etymologie von Aram,”
ZDMG 61 (1907) 194–95. ■ E. G. H. Kraeling, Aram and Is-
rael (New York 1918) 18–22. ■ S. Moscati, “Aramean Ahl-
amu,” JSS 4 : 4 (1959) 303–7. ■ M. M. Noah, The Book of Ya-
shar (New York 1972). ■ W. Pitard, Ancient Damascus
(Winona Lake, Ind. 1987) 81–86.
Peter Altmann
Aram (Place)
/Arameans
Arama, Isaac ben Moses
The most influential preacher in the generation of
Spanish Jewry’s 1492 expulsion, Arama (1420‒
1494) served as a rabbi in several Spanish cities and
619 Aramaic Apocryphon of Daniel (4QapocrDan ar/4Q246)
passed the closing year or two of his life in Naples
after the expulsion. His exegetical corpus com-
prises Aqedat Yitshø aq, a vast exposition of the Torah
divided into 105 sections or “portals,” and com-
mentaries on the Five Scrolls and Proverbs.
Aqedat Yitshø aq is an elaborately reworked record
of oral sermons delivered by Arama in the synago-
gue. He divides each sermon into two parts: an in-
vestigation (derishah) of “particular subjects in the
Torah,” such as the soul, prophecy, or repentance,
and a commentary (perishah) according to scrip-
ture’s “plain sense,” in which difficulties are raised
and addressed. Overall, the work is characterized
by great homiletic intricacy and a heavy prose style
bordering on the baroque.
Among other things, Arama aims to repel the
twofold challenge posed to Judaism by Greco-Ara-
bic philosophy and Christianity. Arama asserts rev-
elation’s ultimate superiority over human reason in
response to the former and Judaism’s greater ra-
tionality in response to the latter. Yet in seeking to
expound scripture in a manner that is compelling
and attractive to his audience, Arama draws exten-
sively on philosophic learning and cultivates a
homiletically rich and theologically probing style
of biblical interpretation that, as he himself notes,
emulates exegetical techniques known to his Jew-
ish parishioners from encounters with their larger
Christian milieu. Though Arama challenges “self-
styled philosophers” whose interpretations neu-
tralize what he deems basic tenets of biblical reli-
gion, he also aims for a reasonable rendering of
holy writ and fosters a genuine dialogue between
classical philosophic sources, Aristotle’s Ethics most
notably, and scriptural teachings on such topics as
law and the human summum bonum. Though he po-
lemicizes against Christianity, he expresses tacit
admiration for Christian theological and exegetical
achievements that ultimately augment the “glory
of the Torah and the prophets” in sharp contrast
to a Jewish commentary tradition that, as he paints
it (reporting views of his parishioners), largely re-
stricts itself to grammatical analysis “and the sim-
ple meaning of the stories and commandments.”
In addition to exposition of individual verses,
the commentaries on the Five Scrolls tend to ex-
plore a religious theme that Arama considers cen-
tral to the book in question. For example, in his
Commentary on Esther (not to be confused with
the one printed with Aqedat Yitshø aq since 1573,
which belongs to his son Meir), the focus is divine
providence. The book of Ruth is also said to foster
a belief in providence as well as impart the princi-
ple of divine retribution.
Aqedat Yitshø aq was influential, leaving its mark
on the Torah Commentary of Arama’s Iberian con-
temporary, Isaac Abarbanel. It proved especially
popular among early modern northern and eastern
European Jewish exegetes and homilists.
Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception vol. 2
© Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York, 2009
Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception 2 (© Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York 2009)
620
Bibliography: ■ I. Bettan, Studies in Jewish Preaching: Middle
Ages (1939; reprint Lanham, MD 1987) 130–91. ■ S. Heller
Wilensky, The Philosophy of Isaac Arama in the Framework of
Philonic Philosophy (Jerusalem 1956). [Heb.] ■ M. Saper-
stein, Jewish Preaching 1200‒1800 (New Haven, CT 1989),
392–93, and in the index. ■ Bernard Septimus, “Yitzhaq
Arama and Aristotle’s Ethics,” in Jews and Conversos at the
Time of the Expulsion (eds. Y. T. Assis/Y. Kaplan; Jerusalem
1999) 1*–24*. ■ B. D. Walfish, Esther in Medieval Garb (Al-
bany, N.Y. 1993).
Eric Lawee
Aramaic Apocryphon of Daniel
(4QapocrDan ar/4Q246)
The Dead Sea Scrolls fragment formerly known as
the “Son of God document,” “Aramaic Apoca-
lypse,” or “Pseudo-Daniel,” and now officially pub-
lished as “4QapocrDan ar” (4Q246), consists of one
and a half columns of nine lines each. In the pre-
served text a Daniel-like figure explains before the
throne the meaning of a king’s vision: in or after a
period of tribulation, involving the king(s) of As-
syria and Egypt, a figure will appear who “will be
called the Son of God, and whom one will name
Son of the Most High” (4Q246 II, 1). A few lines
later we read that “the people of God will arise” (II,
4), that “his/its kingdom will be an eternal king-
dom” (II, 5) and “his/its dominion will be an eter-
nal dominion” (II, 9), phrases which are also used
in Dan 7 : 27 and Dan 7 : 14. Due to the incomplete
text of column I, the identity of the figure who will
be called “Son of God” and “Son of the Most High”
is not clear. Scholars have suggested that he is a
messianic figure (whether heavenly or earthly, or
collectively standing for the people of God, or
merely a future Davidic ruler; Collins and Cross),
or, on the contrary, an adversary royal figure,
whether historical, Seleucid or Hasmonean, or
apocalyptic, claiming divine sonship (overview in
Fitzmyer). In the first case, the eternal kingship
and dominion would be that of a messianic Son of
God, like that of the Son of Man in Dan 7 : 13, and
anticipating the New Testament; but if the one
who is called Son of God is an adversary, then the
eternal kingship of dominion must be of the people
of God, as in Dan 7 : 27.
Such uncertainties make it difficult to ascertain
the relation of 4Q246 to Daniel and to Luke 1. Col-
lins, who identifies the figure with an earthly mes-
siah, argues that the text alludes to Dan 7 and that
the Son of God figure may be a reinterpretation of
the “one like a son of man” of Dan 7. Puech, how-
ever, considers the text contemporaneous with
Daniel, towards the end of the reign of Antiochus
IV Epiphanes. There are several verbal correspon-
dences between 4Q246 and Luke 1 : 32–35. If the
Son of God in 4Q246 is a messiah, then there may
be a literary relation, direct or indirect, between
Luke and 4Q246. However, if 4Q246 refers to an