StrongerBible

rhaka

ῥακά

GreekG4469fool, empty-head

Appears 1 time · tap a cell to see the verses

Mat 5:22
Word studyResearch-graderah-KAHnoun

What rhaka means

empty-head: a casual term of contempt for someone treated as witless and worthless

TranslatabilityUntranslatableCertaintyStrong

Rhaka is not really a Greek word at all. It is an Aramaic insult that Matthew kept in its original sound rather than translating, the way he keeps a few other everyday Aramaic expressions Jesus used. It comes from a word meaning "empty," (ריק) and as an insult it means roughly "empty-head," "blockhead," or "good-for-nothing." To call someone this was to write them off as having nothing upstairs and nothing to offer.

In the world Jesus spoke into, this was a common, almost throwaway insult. Jewish teaching of the period is full of it: it shows up as banter between scholars, as a sharp word thrown at someone who has given offense, and occasionally as a deadly serious condemnation, depending entirely on who said it to whom and why. Lexicons often label it "mild," and at the level of everyday speech that is fair. It was the kind of dismissive jab people tossed off without thinking.

That ordinary, harmless feel is exactly the point in Jesus' one use of the word. In the Sermon on the Mount he traces murder back to the contempt behind it, and he puts this casual slur on the same footing as killing. The shock is not that the word is unusually vicious, but that something so common and so easily excused is named alongside murder before God's judgment. Calling a brother an empty-head treats a person made in God's image as a nobody, and Jesus refuses to let that pass as harmless.

Whether this insult is meant as a notch milder than the harsher "fool" (the word that follows it in the same verse μωρός) or simply names the same contempt from another angle is debated among scholars; see the disputes below.

Mat 5:22

What scholars say about rhaka

There is firm consensus on the lexical basics: ῥακά transliterates the Aramaic emphatic-state רֵיקָא "empty one," a routine Palestinian-Jewish vocative of contempt for a witless, worthless person, well attested in tannaitic and amoraic literature (Strack-Billerbeck I:278-280; b. Taʿanit 20a-b is the closest parallel to Matt 5:22). BDAG glosses it "numskull, fool" and, following Jeremias (TDNT VI:973-976), characterizes it as colloquial, comparatively gentle abuse used among intimates, echoing Basil and Chrysostom. The word is absent from the LXX and from the Mishnah, and after Matt 5:22 it appears in Greek only in patristic exegesis of the verse. Kautzsch's minority derivation (a shortened רֵיקָן) and the older √רקק "spit" etymology are both rejected. Two questions remain genuinely contested: whether ῥακά and the following μωρέ form a real ascending climax (affirmed by Augustine, Hagner, Osborne, Garlington; denied by Jeremias, Davies & Allison, Luz, Nolland, Betz, Guelich), and the text-critical status of εἰκῇ "without cause" in 5:22, which the major critical editions omit (Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 11).

Where scholars disagree about rhaka

Whether "rhaka" (empty-head) and the "fool" that follows it in Matthew 5:22 form a real climb in severity, or simply name the same contempt twice. The traditional reading sees three rising grades of insult matched by three rising penalties; the dominant modern reading sees the two insults as practically interchangeable, with any sense of escalation lying in the punishments rather than in the words.

  • minorityThe two insults form a genuine ascending climax, with "fool" the heavier charge of the two.; Augustine, De sermone Domini in monte 1.9.24; D. A. Hagner, Matthew 1-13, WBC 33A (Word, 1993); G. R. Osborne, Matthew, ZECNT (Zondervan, 2010); D. Garlington, "'You Fool!' Matthew 5:22," Bulletin for Biblical Research 20 (2010) 61-84
  • majorityThe two insults are roughly interchangeable terms for a witless person; the escalation is in the penalties, not the offenses.; J. Jeremias, "Ῥακά," TDNT VI (1968) 973-976; W. D. Davies & D. C. Allison, Matthew, ICC I (T&T Clark, 1988), 511-516; U. Luz, Matthew 1-7, Hermeneia (Fortress, 2007), 233-238; J. Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, NIGTC (Eerdmans, 2005), 227-230
In-depth research

This is a research paper, so it may be hard to read without scholarly background. It is useful if you want to dig even deeper into this word.

Sources

  • BDAG (3rd ed., 2000), p. 903, s.v. ῥακάlexicon
  • J. Jeremias, "Ῥακά," TDNT VI (1968) 973-976theological-dictionary
  • W. D. Davies & D. C. Allison, Matthew, ICC I (T&T Clark, 1988), 511-516commentary
  • U. Luz, Matthew 1-7, Hermeneia (Fortress, 2007), 233-238commentary
  • J. Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, NIGTC (Eerdmans, 2005), 227-230commentary
  • D. Garlington, "'You Fool!' Matthew 5:22," Bulletin for Biblical Research 20 (2010) 61-84journal-article
  • B. M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (1994), 11reference
  • H. L. Strack & P. Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, I:278-280reference

All attested forms of ῥακά

vocative m s

ῥακά

Mat 5:22