The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context

khazarzar.skeptik.net
from khazarzar.skeptik.net More from this publisher
18.07.2013 Views

CHILTON Aramaic and Targumic Antecedents of 'Justification' 393 Lacoque, following H.L. Ginsberg, suggested that the Aramaic (which is taken to stand behind the Hebrew), may have been 'St. 43 The force of Ginsberg's observation is worth recollecting: ... not even a barbarian but only a translator could have said wnisdaq qodes (8:14). As Zimmerman points out, not only does this phrase represent a poor attempt to render an Aramaic wyizke qudsa, "the sanctuary shall triumph" but the latter in turn probably represents a confusion... of wyidke or wyddaki qudsa "the sanctuary will become clean (or be cleansed.) 44 The theory proposes that an initial error confused the root 'Di with '5T, and then the meaning of even the confusion was garbled. The claim that "or unequivocally means 'triumph' derives from Jacob Levy's observation that it is used to render pn* in the Targ. ha. 49.24: 45 The notion of being strong or hard is often associated with the root in Aramaic and Syriac, and can never be excised from its meaning. Within the context of Isaiah, the idea of triumphing, or at least of holding on to one's own, is clearly developed, and the link of pHX in v. 24 to fly in v. 25 especially struck Levy. But it is doubtful that these usages establish that ^T simply means 'triumph', and Levy himself qualified that sense with the phrase 'etwas erlangen'. Moreover, the construction of the Hebrew text by a meturgeman of Isaiah is no indication of what an alleged source of Tobit in Aramaic might have said. Nonetheless, the Targum provides many depictions of 'the righteous' as victorious. Indeed, the verse immediately prior to Levy's example is one case, Targ. Isa. 49.23: MT: Tg: 43. Le Livre de Daniel (Commentaire de 1'Ancien Testament; Paris: Delachaux & Niestle", 1976), p. 119, where the Aramaic is badly misprinted. 44. H.L. Ginsberg, Studies in Daniel (Texts and Studies; New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1948). 45. Cf. Neuhebraisches und Chalddisches Worterbuch fiber die Talmudim und Midraschim 1 (Brockhaus: Leipzig, 1876), p. 534, and 4 (1889), for the usage of pis in Aramaic.

394 The Aramaic Bible: Targums in their Historical Context The innovative usage of topnig in v. 23, and the standard promise of victory for the righteous in the Targum, is the occasion for the usage of D^DT in v. 24, rather than a tight coordination between the root "or and the meaning 'triumph'. A contextual reading of the Targum might be taken to suggest that piis in Aramaic may stand as the equivalent of its Hebrew cognate, and that both convey their senses within the general sphere of meaning of righteousness. In any case, whatever was the case in the transmission of Tobit, the meturgemanin of Isaiah had no difficulty in sorting out the difference between 'ST and "OT as a consideration of Isa. 1.16 will show: MT: Tg: Even here, where a moral dimension is introduced into the exegesis of rot in the Hebrew text, the Meturgeman renders it with 'Di, not '?T. T?T appears in Palestinian Aramaic of the first century as 'be innocent', 46 which is the fundamental sense in the Targum, as 5.23 illustrates: Here the cognate of pis might have been used, as it is in the Masoretic Text, but it was not, presumably because '2* is used more naturally in forensic or legal contexts. 47 By now, one might suspect that 2np pi^tt 1 ) in Dan. 8.14 is to be preferred as the lectio difficilior which explains the others, and that it is neither a barbarism nor in any significant sense a translation 46. Cf. 11Q Targ. Job 9.[8] (for IDT in Job 25.5); 20.4 (for pi* in Job 32.4); 22.3 (for ^ in Job 33.9); 26.[1] (for pi* in Job 35.7); 34.4 (for pi* in Job 40.8). The first and third usages demonstrate that the range of meaning tended more towards the sense of cleanness than in the Aramaic of the Targumim. Nonetheless, the rendering 'be clean' in HQtgJob 34.4 in Fitzmyer and Harrington (where the Hebrew analog is p"rc!) should be questioned; 'que tu aies raison' is preferable, cf. J.P.M. Ploeg and A.S. van der Woude (with B. Jongling), Le Targum de Job de la Grotte XI de Quman (Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen; Leiden: Brill, 1971). The form KfTOi is instanced, meaning 'clean' (cf. 2Q New Jerusalem 4.[8], [14]). That is not surprising, in view of the pattern just mentioned and contemporary usage of not in Hebrew, cf. 1QS 3.4-5; 5Q13 4.2 and M. Baillet, J.T. Milik, R. de Vaux, Les 'Pelites Grottes' de Qumran (DJD III; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962). 47. M. Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (New York: Pardes Publishing House, 1950).

394 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Aramaic</strong> <strong>Bible</strong>: <strong>Targums</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>their</strong> <strong>Historical</strong> <strong>Context</strong><br />

<strong>The</strong> <strong>in</strong>novative usage of topnig <strong>in</strong> v. 23, and the standard promise of<br />

victory for the righteous <strong>in</strong> the Targum, is the occasion for the usage<br />

of D^DT <strong>in</strong> v. 24, rather than a tight coord<strong>in</strong>ation between the root "or<br />

and the mean<strong>in</strong>g 'triumph'. A contextual read<strong>in</strong>g of the Targum might<br />

be taken to suggest that piis <strong>in</strong> <strong>Aramaic</strong> may stand as the equivalent of<br />

its Hebrew cognate, and that both convey <strong>their</strong> senses with<strong>in</strong> the general<br />

sphere of mean<strong>in</strong>g of righteousness.<br />

In any case, whatever was the case <strong>in</strong> the transmission of Tobit, the<br />

meturgeman<strong>in</strong> of Isaiah had no difficulty <strong>in</strong> sort<strong>in</strong>g out the difference<br />

between 'ST and "OT as a consideration of Isa. 1.16 will show:<br />

MT:<br />

Tg:<br />

Even here, where a moral dimension is <strong>in</strong>troduced <strong>in</strong>to the exegesis of<br />

rot <strong>in</strong> the Hebrew text, the Meturgeman renders it with 'Di, not '?T. T?T<br />

appears <strong>in</strong> Palest<strong>in</strong>ian <strong>Aramaic</strong> of the first century as 'be <strong>in</strong>nocent', 46<br />

which is the fundamental sense <strong>in</strong> the Targum, as 5.23 illustrates:<br />

Here the cognate of pis might have been used, as it is <strong>in</strong> the Masoretic<br />

Text, but it was not, presumably because '2* is used more naturally <strong>in</strong><br />

forensic or legal contexts. 47<br />

By now, one might suspect that 2np pi^tt 1 ) <strong>in</strong> Dan. 8.14 is to be preferred<br />

as the lectio difficilior which expla<strong>in</strong>s the others, and that it is<br />

neither a barbarism nor <strong>in</strong> any significant sense a translation<br />

46. Cf. 11Q Targ. Job 9.[8] (for IDT <strong>in</strong> Job 25.5); 20.4 (for pi* <strong>in</strong> Job 32.4);<br />

22.3 (for ^ <strong>in</strong> Job 33.9); 26.[1] (for pi* <strong>in</strong> Job 35.7); 34.4 (for pi* <strong>in</strong> Job 40.8).<br />

<strong>The</strong> first and third usages demonstrate that the range of mean<strong>in</strong>g tended more<br />

towards the sense of cleanness than <strong>in</strong> the <strong>Aramaic</strong> of the Targumim. Nonetheless,<br />

the render<strong>in</strong>g 'be clean' <strong>in</strong> HQtgJob 34.4 <strong>in</strong> Fitzmyer and Harr<strong>in</strong>gton (where the<br />

Hebrew analog is p"rc!) should be questioned; 'que tu aies raison' is preferable, cf.<br />

J.P.M. Ploeg and A.S. van der Woude (with B. Jongl<strong>in</strong>g), Le Targum de Job de la<br />

Grotte XI de Quman (Kon<strong>in</strong>klijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen;<br />

Leiden: Brill, 1971). <strong>The</strong> form KfTOi is <strong>in</strong>stanced, mean<strong>in</strong>g 'clean' (cf. 2Q New<br />

Jerusalem 4.[8], [14]). That is not surpris<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong> view of the pattern just mentioned<br />

and contemporary usage of not <strong>in</strong> Hebrew, cf. 1QS 3.4-5; 5Q13 4.2 and M. Baillet,<br />

J.T. Milik, R. de Vaux, Les 'Pelites Grottes' de Qumran (DJD III; Oxford:<br />

Clarendon Press, 1962).<br />

47. M. Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and<br />

Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature (New York: Pardes Publish<strong>in</strong>g House,<br />

1950).

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!