Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/172

 (e.g. Jer. Virago; Luther, Männin). Whether even in Heb. it is more than an assonance is doubtful (v.i.).—24. An ætiological observation of the narrator: This is why a man leaves and cleaves  and they become, etc.] It is not a prophecy from the standpoint of the narrative; nor a recommendation of monogamic marriage (as applied in Mt. 19$4ff.$, Mk. 10$6ff.$, 1 Co. 6$16$, Eph. 5$31$); it is an answer to the question, What is the meaning of that universal instinct which impels a man to separate from his parents and cling to his wife? It is strange that the man's attachment to the woman is explained here, and the woman's to the man only in 3$16$.

It has been imagined that the v. presupposes the primitive custom called beena marriage, or that modification of it in which the husband parts from his own kindred for good, and goes to live with his wife's kin (so Gu.: cf. KM$2$, 87, 207); and other instances are alleged in the patriarchal history. But this would imply an almost incredible antiquity for the present form of the narrative; and, moreover, the dominion of the man over the wife assumed in 3$16b$ is inconsistent with the conditions of beena marriage. Cf. Benz. EB, 2675: "The phrase may be an old saying dating from remote times when the husband went to the house (tent) of the wife and joined her clan. Still the passage may be merely the narrator's remark; and even if it should be an old proverb we cannot be sure that it really carries us so far back in antiquity."—See, however, Gressmann, ARW, x. 353$1$; van Doorninck, ThT, xxxix. 238 (who assigns 2$24$ and 3$16$ to different recensions).

one flesh] If the view just mentioned could be maintained, this phrase might be equivalent to 'one clan' (Lv. 25$49$); for "both in Hebrew and Arabic 'flesh' is synonymous with 'clan' or kindred group" (RS$2$, 274). More probably it refers simply to the connubium.—25. naked not ashamed] The remark is not merely an anticipation of the

the quotation from Origen given in Field, p. 15$32$.—For, [E]GT$0$ read , which is by no means an improvement.—] See G-K. §§ 10 h, 20 c.—24. ] Add with GVST$J$ and NT citations. [E] has , referring to the offspring.—25. ] 'naked,' to be carefully distinguished from ([root] ) 'crafty,' in 3$1$, is either a by-form of ([root]  ='be bare') in 3$10f.$, or (more probably) a different formation from [root] ('be bare'). See BDB, s.vv.—] The Hithpal. (only here) probably expresses reciprocity ('ashamed before one another'); the impf. is frequentative.