240 Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer emendation is followed by many critical scholars (16), due mostly to the rarity of an object suffix attached to an intransitive verb. To conclude, it is grammatically possible to maintain the attested Qal form. In fact, the very rarity of this form may support its originality. In other words, it is easier to explain the intransitive reading of LXX, despite its lack of object, as a derivative from a tradition attesting the unusual Qal reading, rather than as a conscious change from the more common Piel form. Furthermore, in response to Geiger’s claim, it is noteworthy that the Masoretes left the Piel in Ezek 44,19 unchanged. Therefore, the attested Qal form is in my view original. Furthermore, it is not an easy task to determine whether the verbal suffix should be rendered as a comparative “than” or introducing a dative “to/ for”. It depends on the immediate context of the verb in question. Nevertheless, a comparative sense for ˚ytçdq seems preferable in view of the example from Jer 20,7 (yntqzj) which ideally should be translated “you are stronger than I am”. Hence, ˚ytçdq may best be as “I am holier than you”, thus stating that the speakers in v. 5 regard themselves as holier than their immediate surroundings. 2. The identity of the speakers Our conclusion above that the speakers in v. 5 considered themselves as holier than their surroundings gives us useful insight concerning their identity. First, how should ˚ytçdq be interpreted in the present context? This verb has often been understood to refer not to the “standard” holiness transmitted by YHWH but to a supernatural power given to the speakers as the result of the previously described rites. The use of the root çdq here would thus be blasphemous (17). As far as I am aware, however, this root always refers to holiness connected with YHWH, either attributed to Himself or to the sanctification by Him of a human being/ thing/ place. Therefore, it is in my view more likely that ˚ytçdq here also refers to holiness in relation to YHWH rather than to any sanctification stemming from contact with another deity. Secondly, this claim of holiness is commonly understood as the result of the activities described earlier. The syntax of vv. 3-5, where each claim is introduced with an active participle, however, does not indicate a relationship between the different statements as one of cause and result. Instead, my proposal is that this claim of holiness is an indication of the identity of the people speaking, holiness being their normative state. The category of people most suitable for this kind of label is the priesthood. Hanson, coming from another direction, suggests a different reason for (16) E.g., B. DUHM, Das Buch Jesaia (Göttingen 1922) 476, C. VON ORELLI, Der Prophet Jesaja (KKAT; München 1904) 220, K. MARTI, Das Buch Jesaja (KHAT; Tübingen 1900) 402, P. VOLZ, Jesaja (KAT; Leipzig 1932) II, 279, n. k, T.K. CHEYNE, Introduction to the Book of Isaiah (London 1895) 368, n. 1, J.L. MCKENZIE, Second Isaiah (AB 20; Garden City 1968) 194. (17) E.g., MCKENZIE, Isaiah, 195, J.D. SMART, History and Theology in Second Isaiah. A Commentary on Isaiah 35, 40-66 (London 1967) 277, and R.N. WHYBRAY, Isaiah 40–66 (NCBC; Grand Rapids 1975) 270.