^{page 318 note 1} Cf. Cullmann, O., ‘Que signifie le sel dans la parabole de Jésus’, R.H.P.R. XXXVII 36–43; 39.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 2} Taylor, V., The Gospel according to St Mark (London, 1953), pp. 413–14;Google ScholarVaganay, L., ‘Le Schématisme du Discours Communautaire à la lumière de la Critique des Sources’, R.B. LX (1953), 203–44; 237.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 3} Griffiths, D. R., ‘The Salt-Sections in the Gospels’, E.T. LIX (1947–1948), 81–2;Google ScholarDelling, G., ‘BAΠTIΕMA BAΠIΕΘHNAI’, N.T. II (1957), 92–115; 113.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 4} Delling, G., loc. cit.;Google Scholarcf. Jeremias, J., Unbekannte Jesusworte (Gütersloh, 1951), pp. 53–5.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 5} Torrey, Ch. C., The Four Gospels (New York–London, 1947 ²), p. 302.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 6} Pallis, A., Notes on St Mark and St Matthew, new edition (Oxford–London, 1932), p. 34.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 7} Chajes, H. P., Markusstudien (Berlin, 1899), p. 53.Google Scholar

^{page 318 note 8} Bergmann, J. in a review in O.L.Z. VII (1904),Google Scholar coll. 21–2 of Halévy's, J.Études Évangeliques, 1 (1903).Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 1} Halévy, J., ‘Un peu de Lumière’, O.L.Z. VII (1904), 148–9.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 2} Torrey, Ch. C., loc. cit. cf. p. 90.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 3} Barton, G. A., ‘Prof. Torrey's Theory of the Aramaic Origin of the Gospels and the first Half of the Acts of the Apostles’, J.T.S. XXXVI, (1935), 357–73; 363.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 4} Perles, F., ‘La Parabole du Sd Sourd’, R.É.J. LXXXII (1926), 122–3.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 5} This is the verb assumed also by L. Vaganay, loc. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 6} Lewis, A. S.-Gibson, M. D., The Palestinian Syriac Lectionary (London, 1899), p. 62.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 7} Black, M., An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford, 1954 ²), pp. 123–5;Google Scholarcf. Jeremias, J., Die Gleichnisse Jesu (Göttingen, 1956 ⁴), p. 147: ‘in taphel milha b^ematabb^elun.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 8} Itpe'el, partic. pass. masc. of .Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 9} Itpa'al, partic. pass. masc. of: , or pa'el, partic. pass. masc. of the same verb: .Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 10} Itpe'el, impf. 3. m. of or , misheard as or , Itpa'al, impf. 3. m.Google Scholar

^{page 319 note 11}

^{page 320 note 1} b. Sank. 39^a: …: a full translation of the passage in Strack, H. L.—Billerbeck, P., Kommentar zwn Neuen Testament, II (München, 1924), 21.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 2} Verse 43: cf. verse 48: (= Isa. lxvi. 24).Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 3} Jastrow, M., A Dictionary of the Targwnim, the Talmud Babti and rerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, vol. 1 (New York, 1903, repr. 1950), 517;Google Scholarcf. Krupnik, B.—Silbermann, A. M., vol. 1 (London, 1927), 329.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 4} Levy, J., Neuhebräisches und Chaldäisches Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim, Tl. u (Leipzig, 1879), 535.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 5} Jastrow, M., loc. cit.; B. Krupnik, loc. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 6} Cf. Torrey, Ch. C., ‘Studies in the Aramaic of the First Century A.D.’, Z.A.W. sxv (1953), 228–47: Torrey gives as ‘a first attempt’ an alphabetical list of twenty-four words.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 7} See the additional note on .Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 8} Or with the participle mitt'bel ‘baptized’, wrongly vocalized as mitt'bel ‘seasoned’.Google Scholar

^{page 320 note 9} The active seems to be the more probable form, since there was a tendency in Aramaic to avoid passive constructions—cf. the form used in the passage of Sanheclrin mentioned—but the passive form is not impossible, as can be seen from the Gospels where the passive constructions seem to have an equivalent in the kerygma of the Primitive Church; we may refer to Matt. iii. 6, 13, 14; Mark i. 5, 9; Ebion. Ev. fragm. 3 with their explicit ύπό (which was perhaps the rendering of Aramaic (i) είς, cf. I Cor. x. 2 (2) 7uacgr;πό). In this connexion it seems important to pay attention to the: …baptizemur ab eo…; …baptizer ab eo…, which Jerome found ‘in evangeio iuxta Hebraeos quod Chaldaico quidem Syroque sermone sed Hebraicis litteris scriptum est’ (c. Pelag. III, 2). In Jewish Aramaic, however, the passive construction has not been found; but we have in this Aramaic a causative ‘af'el, e.g. ‘we make her bathe’ in b. Nidda 30^a; cf. the corresponding hif'il in Gerim i. 8: . The sources of Gerim are from the first and second century; the early use of the causative stems in connexion with baptism may be another indication of the possibility of the passive of in the Aramaic of Jesus and his early church.Google Scholar