Editing Masoretic Text (section)

=== Second Temple period ===
The discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]] at [[Qumran]], dating from {{nowrap|c. 150 BCE – 75 CE}}, shows that in this period there was no uniform text. According to [[Menachem Cohen (scholar)|Menachem Cohen]], the Dead Sea scrolls showed that "there was indeed a Hebrew text-type on which the Septuagint-translation was based and which differed substantially from the received MT."<ref name="Cohen1979"/> The scrolls show numerous small variations in [[orthography]], both as against the later Masoretic Text, and between each other. It is also evident from the notings of corrections and of variant alternatives that scribes felt free to choose according to their personal taste and discretion between different readings.<ref name="Cohen1979">{{cite book |first=Menachem |last=Cohen |url=http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/CohenArt/ |article=The idea of the sanctity of the biblical text and the science of textual criticism |title=HaMikrah V'anachnu |editor-first=Uriel |editor-last=Simon |publisher=HaMachon L'Yahadut U'Machshava Bat-Z'mananu and Dvir |place=Tel-Aviv, Israel |year=1979}}</ref>

The text of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Peshitta read somewhat in-between the Masoretic Text and the old Greek.<ref name="Tov"/> However, despite these variations, most of the Qumran fragments can be classified as being closer to the Masoretic Text than to any other text group that has survived. According to [[Lawrence Schiffman]], 60% can be classed as being of proto-Masoretic type, and a further 20% Qumran style with a basis in proto-Masoretic texts, compared to 5% proto-[[Samaritan Pentateuch|Samaritan]] type, 5% [[Septuagint]]al type, and 10% non-aligned.<ref>{{cite book |first=L. |last=Schiffman |title=Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls |publisher=Yale University Press |edition=illustrated |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-300-14022-4}}{{page needed|date=January 2015}}</ref> [[Joseph Fitzmyer]] noted the following regarding the findings at Qumran Cave&nbsp;4 in particular: "Such ancient recensional forms of Old Testament books bear witness to an unsuspected textual diversity that once existed; these texts merit far greater study and attention than they have been accorded till now. Thus, the differences in the Septuagint are no longer considered the result of a poor or tendentious attempt to translate the Hebrew into the Greek; rather they testify to a different pre-Christian form of the Hebrew text".<ref>{{cite book |first=Joseph |last=Fitzmyer |title=The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible: After Forty Years |page=302}}</ref> On the other hand, some of the fragments conforming most accurately to the Masoretic Text were found in Cave&nbsp;4.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Ulrich, E. |author2=Cross, F. M. |author3=Davila, J. R. |author4=Jastram, N. |author5=Sanderson, J. E. |author6=Tov, E. |author7=Strugnell, J. |year=1994 |article=Qumran Cave&nbsp;4, VII, Genesis to Numbers |title=Discoveries in the Judaean Desert |volume=12 |publisher=Clarendon Press, Oxford}}<!-- Not clear from the original plain text citation whether this is a book or a journal article. The citation renders exactly as the original plain text cite. --></ref>

[[Tannaitic]] sources relate that a standard copy of the Hebrew Bible was kept in the court of the Second Temple for the benefit of copyists<ref>Y. Sanh. 2:6, y. Shek. 4:3, m. MK 3:4, m. Kelim 15:6.</ref> and that there were paid correctors of biblical books among the officers of the Temple.<ref>B. Ket. 106a, y. Shek. 4:3, y. Sanh. 2:6.</ref> The [[Letter of Aristeas]] claims that a model codex was sent to [[Ptolemy II Philadelphus|Ptolemy]] by the [[Eleazar (High Priest)|High Priest Eleazar]], who asked that it be returned after the [[Septuagint]] was completed.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Blau |first=Lajos |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0-4UAAAAYAAJ |title=Studien zum althebräischen Buchwesen und zur biblischen Litteraturgeschichte |date=1902 |publisher=E.K.J. Trübner |pages=100 |language=de}}</ref> [[Josephus]] describes the Romans taking a copy of the Law as spoil,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Flavius Josephus, Wars of the Jews 7.96-7.162 |url=https://lexundria.com/j_bj/7.96-7.162/wst |access-date=2024-07-21 |website=lexundria.com}}</ref> and both he and [[Philo]] claim no word of the text was ever changed from the time of Moses.<ref>{{Cite book |author=Eusebius of Caesarea |author-link1=Eusebius |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nt_YAAAAMAAJ&pg=PP7 |title=pars 1. Libri I-IX anglice redditi; pars 2. Libri X-XV anglice redditi |date=1903 |publisher=Typographeo Academico |pages=357a |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Josephus: Against Apion I |url=https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/apion-1.html |access-date=2024-07-21 |website=penelope.uchicago.edu}}</ref>

In contrast, an [[Amoraim|Amoraic]] narrative relates that three Torah scrolls were found in the Temple court, at variance with each other. The differences between the three were resolved by majority decision.<ref>Y. Taanit 4:2; Soferim 6:4; Sifrei Devarim 342.</ref> This may describe a previous period, although [[Solomon Zeitlin]] argues it is not historical.<ref>For a discussion see: {{cite journal |author=Zeitlin, S. |date=April 1966 |title=Were there three Torah-scrolls in the Azarah? |journal=[[The Jewish Quarterly Review]] |series=New Series |volume=56 |issue=4 |pages=269–272 |doi=10.2307/1453840 |jstor=1453840}}</ref>