Sinaiticus Tobit - examination for Latin vorlage, Donaldson-style Latinisms, Mt. Athos ms source (ms 319 - Vatopedi 513)

Steven Avery

(The Characterization of Tobit in the Light of Tobit 1:1-2 by Emmanuel Nshimbi)

addresses your point. It dismisses the omission as accidental, but suggests that the missing verses contain unorthodox Jewish practises, which were deliberately left out (for which see p.34 onwards).

Here is the crux:

"The omission of Tob 4:7-18 in GII renders the text cohesive, because the
narrative does not need to deal with other themes, such as giving food to the
dead, which the Hebrew religion may also consider unorthodox.77 Moore
observed in his commentary on GII Tobit 4, that, “to be sure, vv 7-18 actually
impede the movement of the plot (i.e., Tobit’s telling Tobiah about the money at
Ráges [vv 1, 20].”78 These factors shed light on “why S neglected to copy this
section.”79 They lead me to suggest that scribal scissors performed their task for
verses 7-18 of Tobit 4, because they undermine GII’s religious practice, besides
impeding the flow of the plot.80

Above all, the omission of Tob 4:7-18 in GII characterizes Tobit as an
adherent of orthodox Jewish practices, which do not recommend giving food to
the dead. It reflects traces of GII’s conversations with its audiences, which the
narrative addresses.81 GI’s witness to these verses prompts the hearer or reader
of the narrative to ponder on Tobit’s character, without sturdy answers.

NB: this author seems to have little answer to the generally accepted proposition that GII is the more original Greek version because it otherwise (i.e. apart from the omission) replicates The Hebrew and Aramaic.