18.07.2013 Views

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

SHINAN <strong>The</strong> Aggadah of the Palest<strong>in</strong>ian <strong>Targums</strong> 207<br />

brought by Targum Pseudo-Jonathan before and after this verse from<br />

Genesis:<br />

Genesis 3.4: iimon mn ^ noun •?» omn ~<strong>in</strong>»"i i(=And the serpent said to<br />

the woman, You shall not die).<br />

Pseudo Jonathan:<br />

(= At that time the serpent<br />

slandered its creator and said to the woman: 'You shall not die, for every<br />

craftsman hates his fellow-craftsman').<br />

First we are told that the serpent slandered the words of the Lord, and<br />

lastly, we are told the content of his words. <strong>The</strong> snake reassures the<br />

woman: proscrib<strong>in</strong>g the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge is but the<br />

act of a jealous craftsman, eager to ward off all rivals, eager to protect<br />

his trade-secrets. We are not told however why eat<strong>in</strong>g from the<br />

prohibited fruit will elevate man to be God's fellow-craftsman.<br />

This last po<strong>in</strong>t becomes clear by compar<strong>in</strong>g the Targum to the follow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

tradition <strong>in</strong> Midrash Genesis Rabbah: 12<br />

Genesis Rabbah 19.6:<br />

(= R. Joshua of Sikn<strong>in</strong> said <strong>in</strong> R. Levi's name: He [the snake] began<br />

speak<strong>in</strong>g slander of his creator, say<strong>in</strong>g, 'Of this tree did He eat and then<br />

create the world; hence He orders you, you shall not eat thereof, so that<br />

you may not create other worlds, for every craftsman hates his fellow<br />

craftsmen').<br />

<strong>The</strong> aff<strong>in</strong>ity between Targum and Midrash is clear and unmistakeable,<br />

and it is with the hundreds of such examples that I would shape the<br />

first part of this paper. S<strong>in</strong>ce it is difficult to believe that Targum and<br />

Midrash reached the same tradition and language by tak<strong>in</strong>g separate<br />

and <strong>in</strong>dependent roads, we can of course advance one of two possibilities:<br />

(a) direct dependence between Targum and midrashic tradition<br />

(<strong>in</strong> this direction or that); (b) <strong>in</strong>direct dependence: that is, use of<br />

a common source (written or oral) which stood before the author of<br />

the Midrash and the Meturgeman. Yet the difference between these<br />

two answers is not all that significant. Both postulate an <strong>in</strong>tertextual<br />

aff<strong>in</strong>ity, whether direct or <strong>in</strong>direct, based on a written or oral source.<br />

And as for the example noted above, we may even succeed <strong>in</strong><br />

12. Ed. J. <strong>The</strong>odor and Ch. Albeck, (Jerusalem, 1965), pp. 172-73 [Hebrew].<br />

Cf. M. Maher (trans.), Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: Genesis (Collegeville, 1992),<br />

p. 25, notes 3-4.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!