The Story of Bguzan-Lilit, Daughter of Zanay-Lilit

On some readings and interpretations in the Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts

“… 65 For this interpretation see also Müller-Kessler 2001–02: 131a. The emendation to YBC 2364 was proposed by Müller-Kessler 1996: 193. …”

More on puzzling words and spellings in Aramaic incantation bowls and related texts

“…It can be found in quite a number of Mandaic magic stories bhn't' gbr' swr'yẖ m'wmyn'lkwn ḏ-srh { ' } w't' ‘lykwn w'škhynkwn kwlkwn “By that Suraian (scribal error for nwkr'yẖ ‘alien’) Gabra I adjured you, by the one who threw himself down and came against you and discovered you all” (13Aa16–19 = BM 135791 I; unpubl. ); kḏ ‘tyt ‘l' 'n' gwb'q ryš ml'k' ‘wz bnẖ ḏ-bwzn'y ml'kywn ḏ-kwlhyn “When I, Gubaq-Dew, the chief angel (and) Uz, the sons of Buznay, the king of all, came against her” (YBC 2364: 24–5 = Müller-Kessler 1996: 188, 190); w‘syr [ ' ] wrgyl' l‘gr'ywn ḏ-l' n‘twn ‘l 〈p‘yr nwkr'y’ gbr'〉 w〈‘l〉 m'm’y pt m'rt' ‘ntt' “and boun[d] and hobbled are their feet so that they cannot come against 〈Pir Nukraya, the man〉 and Mamay pat Martha, the woman” (5Bb12–14 = BM 132955 + ; unpubl.). Further examples are to be noted in late Mandaic magical sources 27…”

Religion and the Aramaic Incantation Bowls

“…The first edition of 22 Jewish Aramaic bowl texts by Naveh and Shaked (1998) in 1985 marked a new plateau by including Aramaic amulets in the discussion, by using parallel texts to complement and improve readings, and by comparing the content to other contemporary and later sources – Greek magic papyri, early magic literature in Hebrew, and magic fragments in the Cairo Geniza – in order to understand the terminology and praxis of the Aramaic texts. In the preface to their 1985 edition, Naveh and Shaked (1998, p. 10) asserted that their purpose was to provide ‘philologically reliable material, and not to offer a detailed study of the religious implications of these texts.’ More recently, Müller‐Kessler (1996, 1999) has widened the discussion further to include the early Mandaic texts inscribed on lead rolls to help elucidate the bowl texts.…”

“…29–30)? According to Müller‐Kessler (1996, p. 185), isolated elements and complete formulae occur on both magic bowls and on lead rolls. For instance, there are extensive parallels in phraseology among three Mandaic adjuration texts, a Babylonian Jewish Aramaic bowl (Greenfield & Naveh 1985, pp.…”

“…For instance, there are extensive parallels in phraseology among three Mandaic adjuration texts, a Babylonian Jewish Aramaic bowl (Greenfield & Naveh 1985, pp. 97, 102–4) and a Syriac bowl in proto‐Manichaean script (Müller‐Kessler 1996, p. 185). In the judgment of Müller‐Kessler, ‘the scribes who produced such objects presumably drew their texts from a specific corpus of incantations.’ According to Naveh and Shaked (1998, p. 27), the transmission of magical formulae was both written and oral.…”