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.
Neglected Physical Dimensions of “Shameâ€
Terminology in the Hebrew Bible 1
The subject of shame has received considerable attention from
biblical scholars interested in the fields of psychology and
sociology 2. Corresponding to these two fields, most recent studies
on shame assert the importance of shame’s internal-psychological
dimensions and especially its external-social dimensions. According
to modern psycho-analytic studies, shame denotes internal feelings
of worthlessness and negative internal evaluation (sometimes
overlapping with guilt) in response to perceived social or individual
ideals 3. Shame can function positively to prevent disgrace or
negatively to diminish self-worth 4. In the social sciences, shame
This article is an expanded version of a paper delivered at the Society of
1
Biblical Literature Annual Meeting (New Orleans, November, 2009). Special
thanks to A. Lynch, D. Lambert, M. Bates, and A. Sherwood for reading and
commenting on earlier drafts.
See L.M. BECHTEL, “Shame as Sanction of Social Control in Biblical
2
Israel : Judicial, Political and Social Shamingâ€, JSOT 49 (1991) 47-76; ID.,
“ The Perception of Shame within the Divine-Human Relationship in Biblical
Israel â€, Uncovering Ancient Stones. Essays in Memory of H. Neil Richardson
(ed. L.M. HOPFE) (Winona Lake, MI 1994) 79-92; S.M. OLYAN, “Honor,
Shame, and Covenant Relations in Ancient Israel and its Environmentâ€, JBL
115 (1996) 201-218; V H. MATTHEWS, “Honor and Shame in Gender-Related
.
Situations in the Hebrew Bibleâ€, Gender and Law in the Hebrew Bible and in
the Ancient Near East (eds. V H. MATTHEWS – B.M. LEVINSON – T. FRYMER-
.
KENSKY) (New York 2004) 97-112; R. RABICHEV, “The Mediterranean
Concepts of Honour and Shame as Seen in the Depiction of the Biblical
Women â€, RT 3 (1996) 51-63.
See J. STIEBERT, The Construction of Shame in the Hebrew Bible
3
(JSOTSS 346; Sheffield 2002) 8, 168. Stiebert’s definition of shame captures
psychological and sociological aspects: “Shame ... is an emotion focused on
the vulnerability and conspicuousness of one’s [subjective, internalized] self-
image ... in terms of a perceived [objective, external] ... ideal †(3). Though
integrating sociological insights, Stiebert (108-109; 128; 165-166) develops the
psychological dimensions of shame in the prophets, arguing that most of the
biblical material is ill suited to yield the kind of data pursued by adherents of
the Mediterranean shame-honor paradigm.
Positive dimensions of shame have occupied the attention of recent
4