11a great Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.

7a the next day Hebrew Variant: Addition

• 4QXII^g (see 4Q82 f88-91i:5): following lmḥrt ("the next [day]"), it adds hywm ( "the day"; →DJD XV, 312).

8b became faint Physical or Emotional/Spiritual Affliction? The versions translate M’s yit‘allāp with verbs that denote physical, emotional, and spiritual affliction. In the minds of these ancient interpreters, therefore, it is clear that Jonah’s physical suffering complements his anguish already described in Jon 4:1–2.

• G: ôligopsuchêsen “he was discouraged,” or “he was faint”;
• V: aestuabat “he was agitated,” or “he was burnt”;
• S: we’tᵉṭarap “and he was overwhelmed,” or “he was exhausted” (Comparison of Versions Jon 2:7a).

1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a appointed Insistence on the Verbal Nature of God's Command to Creation The verb “to appoint” is repeated four times (Literary Devices Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a).

G: “commanded”

• The four occurrences of the pi‘el of mnh (“to appoint,” “to send”) in Jon 1:17; 4:6,7,8 are all translated by prostassô. 
• These are the only four places where this correspondence is found (→Hatch and Redpath 1906, 2:1220).
• Thus, G slightly shifts the language used to depict God’s providential direction of events in the Book of Jonah; whereas his direction of creation is somewhat general and behind-the-scenes in M, G conveys an implicit verbal dimension and a degree of anthropomorphism. This aspect of the translation is addressed by some of the Church Fathers who are uncomfortable with the notion that God would talk to an irrational creature (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 1:17a).
• It moreover emphasizes that God’s word directs the created world.
• As one might expect, the Vetus Latina translates G’s prostassô uniformly with the verb praecipere (“to order,” “to instruct”).

V: Variation in Language

V does not reflect the uniformity of M. Did Jerome prefer the elegance of variatio over philological consistency?

• praeparare (“to prepare”) is used in Jon 1:17 and Jon 4:6;
• parare (“to provide”) is used in Jon 4:7;
• praecipere (“to order,” “to instruct”) is used in Jon 4:8.

S: “prepared” or “commanded”

Like G, S implies that God’s direction of created works involves speech.

• S translates mnh with tyb only at Jon 1:17.
• The remaining three instances (Jon 4:6,7,8) are rendered by pqd + l- (“to command,” “to give an order to”).

3:7b–8a; 4:11b animal Specific or General The term bᵉhēmâ can generally refer to all animals, as opposed to human beings; or it can more specifically denote domesticated animals. Since it is paired here with hā’ādām, we have opted for the more general meaning (Comparison of Versions Jon 3:7b,8a; Biblical Intertextuality Jon 3:5,7; 4:11).

3:10–4:11 Use in Lectionary

• →RCL: Proper 20, Year A.

3,8f NARRATION Characterization of Jonah by Death Wish

• Jonah twice clearly expresses a wish to die (Jon 4:3,8), and this contributes to the negative characterization of the prophet as exceedingly stubborn.
• In Jon 4:9, readers encounter a third, indirectly-stated wish for death that nonetheless amounts to a reinforcement of this wish.
• Additionally, one could argue that Jonah had earlier assumed that being thrown into the sea would kill him (cf. Jon 1:12), in which case this could be counted as another implicit wish for death.

See also Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:3,8f.

1–11 Puzzling Plant and Anger In the Qur’an, Allah creates the plant in order to strengthen Jonah, weakened by his stay in the whale. The fish deposits Jonah in a wasteland; God sends the plant to give him food and shade. It is traditionally thought that “Yaqtin” refers to a gourd—called in a hadith “Jonah’s plant.”

• →Qur’an 37.145–146 “But We cast him forth on the naked shore in a state of sickness, and we caused to grow, over him, a spreading plant of the gourd kind.”

In the Qur’an, the episode happens at a different time than in the biblical narrative since it precedes Nineveh’s conversion. The Qur’an therefore does not link the plant’s story with Jonah’s anger after Allah spares Nineveh in spite of his prophecy. However, the Qur’an does mention that Jonah was angry (see →Qur’an 21.87). This anomaly disturbed several commentators who had difficulty with understanding how a prophet could be angry with God’s will.

6c to protect Divergent Hebrew Textual Tradition?

• In M, V, and S the plant provides Jonah “deliverance/relief” (Heb. hip‘il of nṣl, Lat. protegere, Syr. ʾrwḥ).
• In G, however, the gourd “shades” Jonah (skiazô). This produces a redundant reading: “it [i.e., the gourd] rose up above Jonah’s head to be a shade (einai skian) over his head to shade (skiazô) him from his calamities (lit. ‘evils’).”
• 4Q82 f88-91i:2 (4QXII^g) attests the consonants lhṣl. This could be analyzed as a lamed plus the hip‘il infinitive construct of the root ṣll (III), meaning “to give shade” (cf. Neh 13:19; Ez 31:3). Such an alternate reading might be the basis of G’s translation (cf. →DJD XV, 312). 

7a when dawn arose Hebrew Variant: "as the morning rose"

• M: b‘lwt reads the preposition bᵉ: “in the raising of dawn”;
• 4QXII^g (see 4Q82 f88-91i:5) reads “as the morning rose” (k‘lwt).
• →Tg. Jon. reads bᵉmîsaq, which supports M. 

The variant in 4QXII^g is most likely the result of a (mis)reading of kaph for beth (→DJD XV, 312).  

6d was greatly delighted Cognate Accusative The cognate accusative construction that appears here is similar to the internal adjunct of Jon 4:1. The use of this construction achieves two things:

• It emphasizes Jonah's strong positive response to the presence of the plant.
• It contrasts Jonah's current positive response (delight) with his earlier negative response (Grammar Jon 4:1).

8c wished for his life to end Syntax of the Death Wish

• The Hebrew idiom is comprised of a waw-consecutive + direct object + infinitive construct: wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût.

• It can be translated woodenly as "he asked his life/breath (’et-napšô) to die," but the present translation has opted for a more idiomatic rendering in English.  

6c evil Leitwort in the Service of Irony See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.

6d greatly Leitwort, Meaning See Literary Devices Jon 1:2.

8c he wished for his life to end Translation of a Hebrew Idiom The Hebrew idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût (“he wished/desired his life to die”) is handled in a few different ways by the versions. Both V and S illustrate the difficulties involved in a verbatim translation. G, on the other hand, is less literal but captures the meaning of the Hebrew, while also conveying the idiom’s rarity.

G: An Elegant Solution

• G renders it with the phrase apelegeto tên psuchên autou (“he renounced his life”). Not only is apolegô a hapax legomenon in G, but it is also relatively rare in Greek literature.

• Plutarch uses the verb in a similar manner (though in the active voice) in reference to high ranks or prizes (ta prôteia), victory (tên nikên), and life (ton bion; see →Plutarch Luc. 42.5; →Nic. 6.2; →Sol. 12.1).

• Perhaps owing to the rarity of the verb apolegô, the Vetus Latina does not capture its exact sense, opting instead to render it with taedere (“to be tired/weary”).

V: A Wooden Translation

• V closely follows the Hebrew with its petivit animae suae ut moreretur (“he desired in his soul that he might die”). This seems to go beyond the bounds of idiomatic Latin.

S: Inversion of the Syntax

• In S the sense of the phrase is conveyed with similar lexemes, though in a different syntactic arrangement: wš’l mwt’ lnpšh (“he requested death for his soul”).

5–8 SCENARIO Prophetic Symbolic Action? In Scripture, wordless prophecies are meant to communicate certain truths viscerally.

• Hosea marries a prostitute, has children with her, and gives them strange names (Hos 1–3).
• Jeremiah breaks clay vessels (Jer 19) and wears wooden yokes (Jer 27). 

Here, God uses the plant’s death to impress upon Jonah that God laments the destruction of his creation.

6ff SCENARIO Parallel Lives of Jonah and Job? God’s behavior drives the narrative in both Jon 4:6–8 and Jb 1–3, which invites comparison. 

• Each protagonist receives beneficence from the hand of God. Jonah has a shade-giving plant (Jon 4:6). Job has prosperous lands, many flocks, and a large family (Jb 1:1–3). 
• Then, with God’s command or consent, each one's fortune is taken away (Jon 4:7 // Jb 1:12–19). 
• Likewise, their bodies are struck (Jon 4:8a // Jb 2:7–8). 
• Both attacks involve a devastating rû^aḥ (“wind”; Jon 4:8a // Jb 1:19). 
• Both protagonists are led to question the value of their existence (Jon 4:8b // Jb 3:3–26). 

7a worm Referent in Scripture: Worm, Maggot, Weakling Although tôlā‘ literally means “maggot” or “grub,” most of its biblical occurrences actually refer to the crimson dye derived from kermes, usually dubbed “crimson-grubs” (e.g., Ex 25:4, and more than 30 passages). When used in other contexts, it can refer to:

• a creature that devours plants (here and Dt 28:39);

• a creature that thrives on putrefaction (Ex 16:20; Is 14:11; 66:24);

• a weak person, metaphorically (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).

8c he wished for his life to end Jonah's Agony The heat is so powerful that Jonah experiences excruciating pain.

• →Altschuler and Altschuler_Metzudah: Jonah could not endure the combination of the wind and the heat.
• →ibn Ezra Comm.: Jonah had become extra sensitive to the heat due to his time in the fish's belly.
• →Kimchi Comm.: Jonah nearly dies from the heat.

Jonah asks for death as a result of such agony. 

• →Alshich Jonah "A righteous man finds death difficult since he would thereby forfeit his opportunity to perform mitzvos; and therefore he prays for long life. But Jonah, feeling himself the irremediable sinner, seeks death as preferable to life" (cited in →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

7a appointed a worm The Worm Absent from Most Children's Books While children’s adaptations frequently simplify the Book of Jonah into a moralistic tale about whale-induced obedience, those that make an effort to include other aspects of the Book of Jonah might push pre-conceived boundaries and engender wonder and delight for child readers.

• →Marzollo 2004 “As a child, I had never heard about the worm. This puzzles me because the worm is important and interesting.”

Although the worm may problematize Jonah’s utility as a moralizing tale, its inclusion in adaptations for children may lead to deeper and more meaningful insights.

5–8 Resting in the Shade in Early Christian Art

Back to Eden or a New Endymion?

Jonah’s pose on this piece is reminiscent of Endymion in pagan sarcophagi; one can also compare Jonah to typical Greco-Roman depictions of Ariadne or of Dionysius, both of whom are usually depicted lounging among foliage. At the same time, the slumberer’s nakedness symbolizes a recovered innocence, like Adam before the Fall.

The right panel of the sarcophagus features the nude prophet resting on a rock amongst animals, in the shade of the divinely provided gourd-plant. Material signifiers (such as big, pendulous, phallic gourds, and huge leaves—broad even for a gourd-plant) express the spiritual abundance eventually achieved by the prophet.

The struggles of pre-Constantinian Christians made the appropriation of this pagan image of rest and well-being particularly appealing and useful. The resting Jonah-Endymion type largely disappears after Constantine.

Patiently Waiting for the End?

One could also give this piece an eschatological interpretation. Jonah peacefully rests in the shade of the Church, enjoying her spiritual fecundity, while awaiting the eschaton and the total destruction of sin and death.

9b Is it good for you to be angry? Repetition and Development God repeats and modifies the question which Jonah ignored in Jon 4:4. Here, God is not referring to the anger that Jonah has toward the repentance of the Ninevites and God’s relenting from punishment, but rather to the anger Jonah has toward the death of the plant. Jonah’s response appears uninformed by biblical traditions associated with “shade/protection” (Jon 4:5–6 ṣēl), which repeatedly point to God as the sole means of shade/protection (Ps 17:8; 36:7; 91:4).

11 Concluding Unanswered Question The narrative ends with a long rhetorical question addressed to Jonah. It serves also as a conclusion of the whole book. The question reaches beyond the beginning of the book, for the apparent first question of the impending destruction of Nineveh is solved. Since the ending does not give Jonah’s answer, the text arguably closes with narratorial metalepsis: God directs his question not to Jonah, but to the reader.

11a Nineveh Assyria's Last Capital See Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 1:2.

11a Nineveh A City of Biblical Imagination See Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:2.

10f God's Lesson

• →Kimchi Comm. "You pitied it only because of your discomfort…nevertheless you had nothing to do with it..and one usually grieves the loss of something he toiled over."
• →Rashi Comm. "You grieved over its loss not because it was your handiwork, but only because you recognized its usefulness to you in providing shade."

But if Jonah grieves over the destruction of something gratuitous, like the God-ordained qîqāyôn, should not God grieve even more over the destruction of his own creation, namely the Ninevites—and, by extension, all of mankind? Cf. →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 140–141.

• →ibn Ezra Comm. "The analogy is not exact for God cannot be said to toil over his handiwork. Nevertheless, it is couched in human terms, so that the message would be clearly understood: You took pity on something you did nothing to create, how shall I, by contrast, refrain from taking pity on My handiwork?"
• →Altschuler and Altschuler_Metzudah "The Ninevites are My handiwork; how could I not take pity on such a large city?"

1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a Yhwh appointed + God Appointed — NARRATION Characterization of God through Continuity of Action In the Book of Jonah, the same verb mnh ("appoint") is used four times to describe God’s dealings with Jonah, although it is sometimes translated differently depending on the context (Comparison of Versions Jon 1:17a; 4:6a,7a,8a). He “appoints” different elements of his creation to shape the fate of his reluctant prophet and to communicate to him. Nature’s role in the book manifests God’s control over the cosmos as a whole—even including stubborn human beings like Jonah. Indeed, as we have seen with the storm and the sea-monster, nature is more obedient than Jonah himself.

Nature reprises its role in Jon 4 wherein comfort (Jon 4:6) gives way to discomfort piled on top of discomfort (Jon 4:7–8). God commands a plant to grow; then he commands a worm to kill it. Meanwhile he marshals the sun and a scorching wind against Jonah, before revealing to Jonah his solicitude for the multitudes of Nineveh and their cattle.

6ad,7b,9b,10b What Is the Qîqāyôn-Plant? The term qîqāyôn is a hapax legomenon. The identity of this plant has been a mystery since Antiquity, as the diversity of interpretations among ancient translations shows (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).

→Tg. Jon., Aquila, and Theodotion simply transliterate the word (→Ziegler 1984 ad loc.). In our translation we have opted to follow their lead by simply denoting it “the qîqāyôn”: this clearly notifies the reader of its genus without proffering a particular species (Literary Devices Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). 

6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn Neologism? It is possible that the author did not intend to designate a specific plant by qîqāyôn (Vocabulary Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b; Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). This opens up several interpretive possibilities.

• It is an exotic term, employed to reinforce the impression of a foreign, exotic setting. Perhaps it was drawn from a foreign language; the exact meaning of qîqāyôn may even have been unknown to the author.

• It is a nonce-word—a word invented just for a single occasion. It is possible that it plays on the verb qy’ (“to vomit”), especially since it is used earlier when the fish vomits Jonah onto the shore (Jon 2:10). 

7b,8b struck RHETORIC Repetition Verbal repetition, common in Jonah, appears here:

• the worm strikes (nkh) the qîqāyôn (Jon 4:7); 
• the sun subsequently strikes (nkh) Jonah’s head (Jon 4:8). 

This repetition emphasizes the larger sequence of divine appointment (Jon 4:6–8). 

10b pity on the qîqāyôn God's Lesson for Jonah

• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "Here God explains the design he had in suddenly raising up the gourd, and then in causing it to perish or wither through the gnawing of a worm; it was to teach Jonah that misconduct towards the Ninevites was very inhuman. Though we find that the holy Prophet had become a prey to dreadful feelings, yet God, by this exhibition, does in a manner remind him of his folly; for, under the representation of a gourd, he shows how unkindly he desired the destruction of so populous a city as Nineveh."

6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Plant in Film

• In Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, not only is the plant and its destruction featured at the end, Jonah's companion throughout is the worm which will consume it (Cinema Jon 1:1–4:11).

3,8f Motif of the Wish for Death Throughout Scripture, a number of key figures wish for death.

LANGUAGE Hebrew Idiom

• The idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût (lit. “he desired his life to die,” Jon 4:8) likewise appears in 1Kgs 19:4, on the lips of Elijah.

CHARACTER Other Desperate Biblical Heroes

• Moses, when struggling to feed the Israelites, calls upon God to kill him if his lot does not improve (Nm 11:15).

• Elijah, sitting under a tree, wishing for death, ends up talking with God. The reversal is apparent: Elijah is dejected because he cannot bring Israel to repentance (cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f), though Jonah’s dejection may likewise be for Israel’s sake (Jewish Tradition Jon 4:3).

• More than merely wish death, Jeremiah wishes he had been stillborn, with his mother as his grave (Jer 20:17).

• Job wishes for death (Jb 3:20–22) and, like Jeremiah, that he had been stillborn (Jb 3:11; cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:6ff).

5–8 God Begins to Show Jonah Having ignored God’s question, Jonah heads eastward (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:5b), away from home, exiting the city and making a booth to await what happens next. In terse succession, the narrative has quickly moved past what appeared to be the story’s central concern, the redemption of the Ninevites, and now focuses on God’s creative and destructive abilities, as well as Jonah’s self-concern. Jonah’s booth-building is reminiscent of Sukkot, the harvest festival celebrating the ingathering of the season’s crops. Agricultural echoes resound in the imagery of the plant, the worm, and the wind. As Jonah waits in his booth, wherein a farmer typically sleeps during harvest-time, readers come to see that God and Jonah have differing understandings of the extent of God’s harvest. Again, readers are forced to interrogate Jonah’s understanding of God’s mercy and its supposed limits.

God

While Jonah waits to see what will become of the city, God’s attention has shifted to his recalcitrant prophet. The repetition of mnh in this pericope displays the ambiguities that attend God’s creative and destructive abilities. God’s concern for Jonah reflects the author’s own interrogation of a theological position that accords with Jonah’s perspective. To whom should God’s mercy be extended? Could it even include Israel’s worst enemy? The answer, if it is given here, is not clear. Rather, God’s sovereignty is emphasized. God appoints things for his own purposes, as he wills. This is true of the plant, the worm, the wind, and even the city of Nineveh itself. Nineveh does not know what role it plays in God’s design, nor does it now know its right hand from its left.

Jonah

Jonah’s second death wish follows quickly on the heels of his first (Jon 4:3). His wish calls Job to mind. Job is distraught by scandalous suffering—Jonah, by scandalous mercy. What does Jonah’s death wish say about his character as a prophet? Is Jonah merely hyperbolic? Some do point to Jonah’s extreme emotions as evidence of satire or comedy; but why should we not take Jonah as seriously as we take Job, for Jonah has just played an important role in bringing God’s salvation to his enemies?

3:5,7; 4:11 LANGUAGE Ancient Pairing: Humans and Animals Two terms are used to designate the Ninevites:

• ’îš (’anšé nînewê, Jon 3:5),
• hā’ādām, when animals are mentioned (Jon 3:7; 4:11).

This language is reminiscent of that used to describe humans and animals in Gn 1–3. The echo may recall the reader to the themes of creation, restoration, and God’s providential care for his creatures (cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 1:1).

1,4,9bc enraged + angry: M | G: confused + grieved | S: distressed + grieved — Translation of Jonah’s Anger Jonah’s emotional reaction to the events of Jon 3 undergoes a shift in G and S.

Translation of ḥrh in G

In General

• The two most common Greek verbs for “anger” are orgizô and thumoô.

• Each is used to render approximately one-third of the total occurrences of the Hebrew term.

• They are typically used when the emotion denoted by it can potentially destroy human life as a kind of punishment.

• Most of the time, God is the subject (e.g., Ex 32:22), although both verbs can be used for human beings (e.g., Nm 22:27; 24:10).

In the Book of the Twelve

• Four of seven instances of ḥrh are found in Jon 4:1,4,9.

• Outside of Jonah, paroxunô is used twice (Hos 8:5; Zec 10:3). In Hb 3:8 orgizô is used, which is more expected given the frequency of its correspondence to ḥrh in G.

In Jonah

In the Book of Jonah, G treats ḥrh quite differently compared to the rest of the Minor Prophets, as can be seen in the following cases.

• In Jon 4:1 it appears as though the G-translator has rendered the Hebrew wayyiḥar (“he was enraged”) rather freely with sunechuthê (“he was confused"). This translation is unexpected; in fact, of its 17 occurrences in G, Jon 4:1 is the only place where sugcheô renders ḥrh. This translation seems to have been corrected to êthumêsen (“he was angry”) in a couple of manuscripts, including W^c and the Syro-Hexaplar, the latter of which →Ziegler (1984, 251) attributes to Symmachus.

• In Jon 4:4,9 the three occurrences of ḥrh are all translated with lupeô in the middle voice (meaning “he was grieved,” or “saddened”), which seems to be a closer translation than sugcheô from v. 1. Still, there is some semantic distance between the terms. In fact, there are only two other places in G where lupeô translates ḥrh: Gn 4:5 and Neh 5:6. The former verse occurs in a context similar to that of Jon 4, namely that of Cain’s response to God’s rejection of his offering; both Cain and Jonah are pained by God’s actions because they don’t understand how God works. In the case of the latter, Nehemiah is grieved about the treatment of the poor inhabitants of Judea by their fellow Jews. In all of these cases, one can detect a level of emotional hurt or distress.

Translation of ḥrh in S

Jonah

• In Jon 4:1 the Hebrew cognate accusative wayyēra‘…rā‘â (lit. “it was evil…[as] a great evil”) is translated wᵉkeryat…karyutā rabtā (“it grieved [Jonah], a great grief”), and the verb in the second half of the verse, ḥrh (“to be angry”), is rendered by ‘wq (“to be in distress”).

• In Jon 4:1 and Jon 4:9, the three occurrences of ḥrh are again translated by the verb kr‘.

• As with G, therefore, the emotional response of Jonah undergoes a change in translation; i.e., it is not one of anger, but of sorrow and despondency.

Exegetical Impact: The Softening of Jonah’s Response

The overall effect of these translation decisions in both G and S is to soften Jonah’s emotional response, thereby making him more sympathetic. This might explain the reason why the treatment of Jonah in Greek and early Latin Church Fathers does not typically focus on his lackluster reaction to the sparing of the Ninevites.

• The early Latin Fathers follow G via the Vetus Latina (Et contristatus est Jonas tristitia grandi, et confusus est; cf. →Jerome Comm. Jon. 4:1).

• The Greek Fathers, reading G, may have seen Jonah as grieved and confused by God’s forbearance, not angry (Christian Tradition Jon 3:4b,10b; 4:1).

• Whereas S attests a similar translational shift, a number of Syriac Fathers consider Jonah’s anger to be negative, for he feels sorrow rather than happiness at the repentance and salvation of others, indicating his smallness of spirit (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 4:1–5).

1–11 Use in Lectionary

• →RML: Wednesday, Week 27, Year I.

8a scorching Unclear hapax legomenon The Hebrew word ḥărîšît (translated here “scorching”) is a biblical hapax legomenon. It is advisable to follow the versions and translate it as “scorching,” even though its meaning appears to be contextual.

• “Scorching” wind: G, V, and S all translate it in the sense of “scorching” (G: sugkaionti; V: calido; S: dᵉšawbā).

• “Violent” wind: ḥărîšît appears in the Hodayot in the context of a wind that threatens a ship (cf. →1QH^a 15:7–8 [7:4–5 in Sukenik’s numbering]).
• “Deafening” wind (cf. the root ḥrš [II] “to be silent,” “to be speechless”). Were one to draw on later developments in Hebrew, it would also be possible to analyze the word as a pi‘el participle of ḥrš “deafening.” The Targums translate it as “silent,” “gentle” (štyqt’; cf. Jewish Tradition Jon 4:8a). 

5f NARRATION Modest Realism Why does Jonah need a plant when he already has a booth?

• Assuming a modicum of realism in the narrative, one should recall that Jonah is a “stranger in a strange land.” His booth is likely makeshift and perhaps less effective than desired. A plant presumably provides better protection from the heat than a booth does, since it gives both shade and air-flow, hence adding to Jonah’s happiness.
• A more theological reading is possible. Whereas Jonah builds the booth himself, God sends the plant. This is an image of divine-human cooperation. Moreover, the miraculous plant is a sign that God is still with Jonah, even after their dispute in Jon 4:2–4. This continues the book’s central theme: though Jonah tries to flee God, God never abandons him.
• More prosaic is an appeal to text criticism. According to →Wolff (1986, 171), the passage may incorporate several independent traditions.

6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Identity of the Plant in the Versions While the precise identity of the plant in M remains unknown (Historical and Geographical Notes Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b), the versions all identify it as some type of vine plant.

• G: kolokuntha (“gourd-vine”);
• Vetus Latina: cucurbita (“gourd-vine”);
• V: hedera (“ivy”);
• S: bašrurā dᵉqar’ā (“tendril of a gourd-vine”).

→Jerome Ep. 112.22 cites his Jewish teachers when he asserts that the plant is a type of ivy and not a fruit-bearing gourd-plant (History of Translations Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b). S offers a periphrastic translation that identifies more specifically the part of the plant affected. It is possible that the translator was thinking of a kind of melon-plant that was particularly vunerable to sun damage (cf. →CAD 17.2, s.v. šarūru).

6b over Jonah : M | G V: above/over Jonah’s head (Plus in G and V) The phrase mē‘al lᵉyônâ, “over Jonah,” is translated:

• G: huper kephalês tou Iôna;
• V: super caput Ionae.

Both mean “over Jonah’s head” and contain a plus compared to M, which might have been from a desire to clarify the text. In both G and V, these pluses introduce some repetition since a nearly identical phrase follows in v. 6c: huperanô tês kephalês autou; super caput eius.

8d Expansion in S Jonah’s direct speech is quite different in S; it is nearly identical to Elijah’s prayer in S-1Kgs 19:4 (cf. Biblical Intertextuality Jon 1:1f). It appears the translator consciously sought to harmonize Jonah’s prayer with Elijah’s. The petitions of Elijah and Jonah in S are as follows:

• 1Kgs 19:4 saggi li hāšāh māryā sab napᵉš men meṭul dᵉlā hᵉwit ṭāb nā men abāhay “It is enough for me now Lord. Take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.”

• Jon 4:8 māṭe bidayk māryā lᵉmesab napᵉš men meṭul dᵉlā hᵉwit ṭāb nā men abāhay “It has come into your hands, Lord, to take my life from me, for I am not better than my fathers.”

It would appear that presence of the distinctive Hebrew idiom wayyiš’al ’et-napšô lāmût “he wished for his life to end” (in S: waš’el mawtā lᵉnapšeh), which is only found in these two verses, may have led to their harmonization in S.

6–11 The Lesson of the Qîqāyôn-Plant In this final episode of the book, Jonah sits outside the city in a sūkkâ, waiting to see what happens. Will God finally smite the Ninevites? God uses this opportunity to teach a lesson about his mercy.

The rabbis first draw a contrast between Jonah’s own man-made hut and the qîqāyôn that grows at God’s command (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

• →Altschuler and Altschuler Metzudah note that the qîqāyôn is sturdier than the hut, being nourished by the sun and the earth—whereas the hut withers in the heat of the sun.

• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn remarks that the qîqāyôn provides much greater shade than Jonah’s hut, which only provided a modicum of shade. Malbim notes further that while Jonah may have first rejoiced in the plant—thinking it a sign that God approved of his interpretation of the prophecy and would destroy Nineveh—the next day God sends a worm to kill the qîqāyôn.

8a wind The Silencing Wind The term used to describe the wind, ḥărîšît, derives from the causative form of the root ḥrš “to stifle.”

• →Rashi Comm. says that this wind is so powerful that it silences all other winds. In his commentary on Ex 14:21, he further adds that “the east wind is the most powerful of all winds. This is the wind by which the Holy One, blessed be He, exacts punishments from the wicked.”
• →Kimchi Comm. adds that this wind is deafening to those who hear it.
• Mahari Kara adds that the wind totally swept away Jonah’s hut and the remains of the qîqāyôn (→Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 139).

6ad,7b,9b,10b ivy (V) The Ivy as Israel

• →Gloss. ord. "Gourd (cucurbita) or ivy (hedera) is a kind of brushwood or shrub that has broad leaves and supports a very dense canopy, which creeps along the ground, and without props to lean on it does not seek higher parts. But God prepared this so that it might provide for the prophet a bower suddenly rising into the sky without any supports—in which God’s power was shown. Israel is compared to this ivy or gourd. Israel once protected Jonah under its own shade—that is, Christ—awaiting the conversion of the nations. The vine provided no small joy, making for him a bower, which has the appearance of a house but is not one, because it does not have foundations."

7a And God appointed a worm TYPOLOGY The Worm Prefigures Christ While on the cross, Jesus invokes Ps 22 by reciting its incipit, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” (Ps 22:1, RSV; cf. Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34). Presuming either that Jesus intended to invoke the entire psalm by referencing its incipit, or that the evangelists thereby intended to show that Jesus prayed the entire psalm on the cross, the whole text could be considered Jesus’ own typological interpretation of his mission, passion, and glorification.

Notably the psalm uses the same word for “worm” as Jon 4:7. Ps 22:6 reads, “But I am a worm (tôla‘at), and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people” (RSV). Based on this—and, of course, the blood symbolism of the crimson-grub’s color (Biblical Intertextuality Jon 4:7a)—a number of the Church Fathers interpret Jonah’s worm as a type of Christ.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the worm that came in the morning and made the gourd plant dry up because of its gnawing strikes me as the same Christ once again, for when the Gospel was preached from his lips, all those things that flourished for a time among the Israelites or had a meaning that foreshadowed what was to come faded away deprived of their meaning."
• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.36 "Let us recognize Christ the worm, and let us suffer human reproach in return for divine salvation. He is a worm on account of the lowliness of the flesh, perhaps also on account of his birth from a virgin. For this creature is usually generated from flesh or any other earthly stuff without any sexual union. He is a worm of the morning because he rose at dawn.”
• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.20 “For in the same way that worms are born without copulation or any prior sexual mingling, so too the birth of the Lord in the flesh was not preceded by any prior mingling…This then is the worm that ‘smote the gourd plant and caused it to wither,’ by which I mean the one who abolished the observance of the Law, as if it were but a shadow, and withered the prideful conceit that the Jews took in it."

6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn The Plant in Children's Stories The plant of Jon 4:6–7 is frequently omitted in retellings for children, for the focus is almost exclusively on the whale (→Introduction §3.14). It does occasionally appear:

• →Marzollo 2004: While sitting in the shade, Jonah comically summarizes his motivations by saying, “Thank you, God. The vine makes waiting for the destruction of Nineveh much easier!”

9ff Divine Lesson in Mercy God repeats the question posed in v. 4, thereby forming a narrative frame that encapsulates the object lesson of the plant and worm. Whereas Jonah previously remained silent, here he answers, repeating his desire for death. As the book concludes with a final poignant question regarding the welfare of 120,000 ignorant persons as well as many animals, the narrative is left unresolved; there is no tying up of loose ends, no response from Jonah, and no indication of how the prophet’s story ended. Why would the author leave the audience with such an unsatisfying ending? Perhaps it is because the purpose of the book is not so much to tell the story of an 8^th c. prophet as it is to examine a theological topic: God’s mercy. On the one hand, the interrelationship of knowledge and culpability underlies God’s final question. God’s mercy toward the Ninevites has to do with their lack of knowledge; compared to Jonah (and, by extension, Israel), who has the privilege of divine revelation, they might as well be ignorant of right and left. Moreover, the narrative implies that Jonah has never considered their position. It is therefore possible that Jonah receives new knowledge about God’s mercy, namely that God has special care for those who are ignorant of him.

This message, however, seems to contradict that of many other biblical prophets, such as Amos and Jeremiah. For them, ignorance is a sign of idolatrous pride, not a reason for mercy. As usual with the Bible, paradoxical contradictions are to be held together. God is compassionate towards the ignorant yet will bring judgment to the idolatrous. Is it possible, then, that the author of Jonah seeks to direct the book’s final question to his contemporary audience—Jewish(?) readers who might have a one-sided understanding of the extent and meaning of God’s mercy? In order to be thoughtfully provocative in this manner, the author places the reader in a position of knowledge that is greater than that of Jonah, since this enables the reader to make judgments about Jonah’s attitudes and behaviors.

Structure of Qal Waḥomer Argument

The placement and structure of God’s repeated question (Jon 4:4,9) aids the reader in deciphering the elements of God’s rhetorical argument. 

• The plant corresponds to the city, Jonah to God, and the destruction wrought by the worm and scorching wind to the potential destruction of Nineveh.
• If Jonah, who had nothing to do with the creation of the qîqāyôn-plant, was so distressed about its destruction, how much more would God, who did in fact create Nineveh as well as every person and animal within it, be distressed about its destruction?

Within the argument, it is important to note the subtle insinuation that Nineveh is like the plant, not only because it is created by God but also because it is ignorant or not guilty, a quality that is explicitly mentioned in God’s final question to Jonah.

Contrast with Usual Happy Endings

Other short narrative portions of the Bible (e.g., Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job’s frame narrative, and Daniel) typically end with accounts of the protagonists living to old age, having families, and being blessed by God. 

• For example, the conclusion to Judith relates that no one attacked Israel again during her lifetime, or for long after her death (Jdt 16:30 [G-16:25]). 

One of the most remarkable aspects of the Book of Jonah is that it does not conclude with any information about the rest of the prophet’s life, the later fate of Nineveh, or any kind of concluding note such as “Jonah agreed with God.” Though purposeful, such an ending can seem unsatisfying to a reader, and this is likely why in the course of reception history, one encounters various attempts to complete the story.

10c overnight Orthographic Variant or Scribal Mistake in 4Q82?

• 4Q82 f88-91i:10 (4QXII^g) reads lyly (masc. pl. cstr.?; →DJD XV, 312).
• M and Mur88 11:27 (MurXII) read lylh (masc. sg. abs.; →DJD II, 191).

10f Qal Waḥomer (a fortiori Argument) God’s response to Jonah employs an a fortiori or qal waḥomer (“light and heavy”) argument. This is the technique of making a small point and using it to illustrate a larger one. That is, the city is greater than the plant, and so anything that applies to the plant will apply a fortiori to the city. Moses argues with God in this way (Ex 6) when he protests that if his own people will not listen to him, then surely Pharaoh would not either.

11b do not know their right hand from their left hand A Unique and Unclear Idiom

• This idiom is found only in Jonah.
• In a similar construction, Barzillai blames old age for not knowing between one thing and another (2Sm 19:35).
• Do the Ninevites not know what they are doing? Or is the city so big and populated they don't know their neighbors (→Sasson 1990, 315)? Or is it a very simple matter, such as knowing which direction to go, beyond their understanding?

See also Jewish Tradition Jon 4:11b; Christian Tradition Jon 4:11b.

11b do not know their right hand from their left hand

Request for Analogical Interpretation

• →Maximus the Confessor Quaest. Thal. 64.1 "The literal sense provides no solution to the problem. For example, the text did not say 'children,' so that I might think it is speaking of infants, but rather it says 'men.' But what kind of man, being sound of mind, is unable to distinguish his right hand from his left? Tell me, then, who these 'men' are, and what are the 'right hand' and the 'left hand' according to an analogical interpretation?"

Ignorance and Innocence

• →Salvian Ep. 4 "When at one time, God had been offended by the sins of the Ninevites, he was appeased by the crying and wailing of children. For though we read that the whole people wept, yet the lot of innocence of the little ones merited the greatest mercy…He thereby declared that because of the purity of the innocent ones, he was also sparing the faults of the guilty ones."
• →Calvin Prael. proph. min. "God then shows here to Jonah that he had been carried away by his own merciless zeal. Though his zeal, as it has been said, arose from a good principle, yet Jonah was influenced by a feeling far too vehement. This God proved, by sparing so many infants hitherto innocent. And to infants he adds the brute animals. Oxen were certainly superior to shrubs. If Jonah justly grieved for one withering shrub, it was far more deplorable and cruel for so many innocent animals to perish. We hence see how apposite are all the parts of this similitude, to make Jonah to loathe his folly, and to be ashamed of it; for he had attempted to frustrate the secret purpose of God, and in a manner to overrule it by his own will, so that the Ninevites might not be spared, who yet labored by true repentance to anticipate the divine judgment."

Cf. Literary Devices Jon 4:11.

11a But I, should I not show pity on Nineveh An Open-Ended Question for Children Though the open-ended nature of the end of Jonah may be unsatisfying to many readers, “the ultimate gap at the end of the book offers another excellent opportunity for religious education” (→Dalton 2007, 306). Although children’s adaptations of biblical stories usually have discussion questions at the end, Jonah is unique in that it already has such a question in the source text. God’s question to Jonah, however, is far more profound than the discussion questions usually subjoined to these texts, which seek answers a child could easily give, such as the correct moral course of action or a simple regurgitation of elements of the narrative. Thus, almost every children’s adaptation of Jonah adds something to the end of the story that elucidates both the ending and God’s question to Jonah.

• Many read Jonah’s silence after God’s question as indicating a change of heart. E.g., →Hoffman 2003, 28 “And Jonah was silent, because he knew God was right.”
• An ending is attached that describes God’s mercy (→McKissack 1998) or the repentance of the Ninevites (→Spier 1985).
• Comedy lightens the ending, as in Jonah the Moaner, where Jonah goes scuba diving in Tarshish (→Page and Page 2006, 24–25).

• Mackall’s adaptation of Jonah tells the story twice—once from the perspective of Jonah and once from the fish. The latter ends with a quotation of the NLT’s paraphrase of Jon 4:11, “Shouldn’t I feel sorry for such a great city?” ( →Mackall 2016, 20).

• Finally, several adaptations note the abrupt and unusual way to end a story, such as →Balsley 2012 “The story ends right there and then. / A big fish tale from way back when, / Still telling us how we should live, / And showing us how to forgive.”
• When the story ends in Jonah: A VeggieTales Movie, a character responds, “Wait a minute…it’s over?” Another asks, “But what did Jonah learn?” The answer given is: “The question, my friends, is not ‘What did Jonah learn?’ The question is—‘What did you learn?’”

11b do not know their right hand from their left hand, and many animals The Innocence of the Ninevites This final remark by God refers to the innocence (or innocents) of the Ninevites (cf. →Zlotowitz and Scherman 1978, 141–142).

• →Rashi Comm. "This refers to the innocent children who would have been swept away only by virtue of their fathers’ iniquities. But having repented, no punishment was due them."
• →Ḥiyya Hegyon: These are the adults who were too simple-minded to deserve punishment.
• →Malbim Gé’ ḥizzāyôn: These are “those who cannot differentiate between the service of Hashem and their idolatrous ways, in contrast to Israel who, by having received the Torah, are more accountable for their actions than are the Ninevites, and who, by implication, are deserving of more severe punishment for having practiced idolatry."

The remark about animals likewise is interpreted to refer to innocence.

• →Rashi Comm. "This figuratively refers to the adults who had beast-like sensibilities inasmuch as they do not know their creator."
• →Kimchi Comm. "Certainly [the animals] are innocent and deserving of compassion. Especially since they were many!"'

1:1–4:11 Significance of the Names for God? Throughout Jonah readers find several names for God: YHWH (22x); ’Ēl/’Ĕlôhîm (13x); and YHWH ’Ĕlôhîm (4x).

• →Magonet (1983) suggests that the generic name is used in the context of punishment, whereas the Tetragrammaton is used in the context of mercy and forgiveness.
• →Sasson (1990, 17–18) charts their usage and concludes that the only sensible solution is to admit to no discernable pattern.

1:1–4:11 Veracity of Jonah as a Miraculous Account

• →Luther Tischr. 3705 “The majesty of the prophet Jonah is surpassing. He has but four chapters, and yet he moved therewith the whole kingdom, so that in his weakness, he was justly a figure and a sign of the Lord Christ. Indeed, it is surprising that Christ should recur to this but in four words. Moses likewise, in few words describes the creation, the history of Abraham, and other great mysteries; but he spends much time in describing the tent, the external sacrifices, the kidneys and so on; the reason is, he saw that the world greatly esteemed outward things, which they beheld with their carnal eyes, but that which was spiritual, they soon forgot. The history of the prophet Jonah is almost incredible, sounding more strange than any poet's fable; if it were not in the Bible, I should take it for a lie; for consider, how for the space of three days he was in the great belly of the whale, whereas in three hours he might have been digested and changed into the nature, flesh and blood of that monster; may not this be said, to live in the midst of death? In comparison of this miracle, the wonderful passage through the Red Sea was nothing. But what appears more strange is, that after he was delivered, he began to be angry, and to expostulate with the gracious God, touching a small matter not worth a straw. It is a great mystery. I am ashamed of my exposition upon this prophet, in that I so weakly touch the main point of this wonderful miracle.”

1:6c,14b; 3:9b; 4:10c perish + perished — Isotopy of Death: Structuring Repetition

Sailors and the Ninevites: “We might not perish”

Hope for salvation from death is expressed by:

• The captain of the ship (Jon 1:6);
• The sailors (Jon 1:14);
• The king and nobles of Nineveh (Jon 3:9).

Jonah: “hurl me into the sea”

Jonah ultimately comes to believe that he can only escape God’s call through death. In the belly of the fish, however, he realizes that such an escape is not possible (cf. Christian Tradition Jon 2:2–6). The sailors' and Ninevites’ desire for salvation is starkly juxtaposed with Jonah’s repeated wishes for death (māwet), both on the ship amidst the storm and in his booth, beyond the walls of Nineveh, for his desire that the Ninevites would receive their comeuppance brings him great anguish when God spares them destruction (Jon 4:8–9).

The Dead Shrub

• The shrub which perishes overnight (Jon 4:10) inspires more pity in Jonah than the potential massacre of Nineveh’s population.

6a YHWH God Hebrew Variant in the Formulation of the Divine Name

• 4Q82 f88-91i:2 (4QXII^g): the Lord Yhwh (’dwny YHWH; →DJD XV, 312).
• M and MurXII (cf. Mur88 11:20): Yhwh God (YHWH ’lwhym; →DJD II, 191).

6ad,7b,9b,10b qîqāyôn BOTANICS Unknown Plant Based on the flora of the region, one can hazard some guesses as to the plant’s identity (cf. Comparison of Versions Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).

• It may be some type of climbing gourd (e.g., bryonia cretica). This is supported by G, Vetus Itala, and S (cf. →Wolff 1986, 170–171).

• It may be a climbing ivy, as in V and Symmachus (→Ziegler 1984 ad loc.; cf. History of Translations Jon 4:6ad,7b,9b,10b).

• Finally, it could be the castor-oil plant—ricinus communis—which grows rapidly, has broad leaves, and provides excellent shade (first identified as such by R. Samuel ben Hofni; see also →Kimchi Comm.). On the other hand, the plant is rather small.

6–9 From Allegory to Antijudaism: Interpretations of Plant and Worm

Allegory for Contents of Scripture

The Old Testament

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the shadow of the vine over his head was the promise of the Old Testament. Its law manifested, as the apostle says, ‘a shadow of things to come’ (Col 2:17). God was offering shade from the heat of temporal evils in the land of promise."

The Gospel of Christ

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 102.35 "But the worm came in the morning. It gnawed at the vine and withered it. For when the Gospel had been published by Christ’s mouth, all those things withered and faded away. The shade of the vine symbolized temporal prosperity for the Israelites. And now those people have lost the kingdom of Jerusalem and their priesthood and sacrifice. All of this was a foreshadowing of the future."

Supercessionist Allegories

• →Luther Lect. Jon. "Finally we have the plant and the worm which attacked the former at the dawn of the day. This phase of the story pertains not only to Jonah, to his anger and his thoughts described in the text, but it is applicable also to Judaism, which was a real wild plant…And now while the Jews complacently rely on being God’s people to the exclusion of all others, and just as Jonah is basking in the enjoyment of this wild plant, God appoints a worm to smite the plant. This signifies that Christ appeared with his Gospel at a time when the Jews vaunted most vaingloriously that they alone were God’s people. He attacked the wild plant, that is, He preached against it and abolished the Law through his Holy Spirit and liberated us all from the Law and its power. Therefore Judaism withered and decayed in the world, and thus we see it today. Its verdure is gone, it flourishes no longer, nor is there a saint or a prophet sitting in its shade today."

6ad,7b,9b,10b gourd + ivy — High Stakes Translation in the 5^th c.  When Jerome published his translation of the Book of Jonah, it caused something of a controversy in the Church.

Accusation of Sacrilege

Jerome’s decision to translate directly from the Hebrew, rather than from the Septuagint—which was traditional and liturgical—was considered sacrilegious by some critics.

• →Jerome Ruf. 1.30 “At that point a certain Canterius…is said to have accused me of sacrilege for translating ‘ivy’ instead of ‘gourd-plant’” (in hoc loco quidam Cantherius…dicitur me accusasse sacrilegii quod pro cucurbita hederam transtulerim).

Augustine's Objection and Jerome's Response

Although Augustine did not consider Jerome’s translation sacrilegious, he thought it wrong to use a novel translation in the liturgy.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 71.5 "For, when a certain brother bishop of ours began to have your translation read in the church over which he presides, a particular passage in the prophet Jonah caused disturbance because it was presented in far different language than had become familiar to the senses and memory and had been chanted for so many ages." 
• →Jerome Ep. 112.22: Jerome suggests that Augustine’s description of events is an exaggeration. A more accurate translation better facilitates the communication of divine truth. Thus his translation should be preferred because hedera (“ivy”) better corresponds to the Hebrew qîqāyôn, which is reflected in Aquila’s translation, kissos.

Augustine's Rebuttal

Not content to leave the matter, Augustine responded to Jerome with an articulation of his view on the authority of the Septuagint and the liturgical (public) proclamation of the Scripture.

• →Augustine of Hippo Ep. 85.35 “I did not want your translation from the Hebrew to be read in the churches for fear that, by introducing something new opposed to the authority of the Septuagint, we might disturb the people of God to their great scandal, for their ears and hearts are accustomed to that translation that even the apostles approved. Hence, if in Jonah that plant is in Hebrew neither an ivy nor a gourd plant, but something else that supports itself by its own trunk without any stakes, I would prefer that we read ‘gourd plant’ in all the Latin translations."

In fact, the Western liturgical tradition largely sided with Augustine. The propers and lectionary of →Miss. Rom. 1570 are largely drawn from the Vetus Latina, not the Vulgate, indicating perhaps that they pre-date Jerome's translation and had already been liturgically established. 

11 Mercy to the Ignorant

Confessional Polemic: Anabaptist Proof Text against Infant Baptism

• Menno Simons, Christian Baptism, "Luther writes that infants should be baptized because of their own faith, and adds, if infants had no faith their baptism would be blaspheming the sacrament. I believe it to be a great error of so learned a man through whom the Lord at the beginning of his writing affected not a little good, to hold that infants who are unable to hear and to understand, have faith, while the Scriptures so plainly state that they know neither good nor evil, that they can not discern right from wrong (Dt 1:39; Jon 4:11)" (→Horsch 1916, 264).

God’s Mercy for Nineveh and Jonah

• →Wesley Notes “The God of infinite compassions and goodness. ‘That great city’—Wouldest thou have me less merciful to such a goodly city, than thou art to a weed? ‘Who cannot discern?’—Here are more than six-score innocents who are infants. Much cattle—Beside men, women and children who are in Nineveh, there are many other of my creatures that are not sinful, and my tender mercies are and shall be over all my works. If thou wouldest be their butcher, yet I will be their God. Go Jonah, rest thyself content and be thankful: that goodness, which spared Nineveh, hath spared thee in this thy inexcusable forwardness. I will be to repenting Nineveh what I am to thee, a God gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and I will turn from the evil which thou and they deserve.”