We now continue with our translation of the Psalm.
The Lord is your guardian,
the Lord is your shadow*
at your right hand.
By day the sun will not strike you,
nor the moon by night.
The Lord will keep you
from all evil,
he will guard
your life.
The Lord will guard
your going out
and your coming in,
from now
and forever.
[*This has often been translated figuratively, as protection or shelter, but "shadow" is the actual meaning of the Hebrew word..]
Saturday, November 24, 2018
We Are Darkness and We Are Light
We are darkness
and we are light,
a fire burning
in the night,
we are the spirit's
unwavering flame.
and we are light,
a fire burning
in the night,
we are the spirit's
unwavering flame.
Translating Psalm 121 - II
To help us pick up our train of thought, here's the ending of our last blog post:
I first learned this Psalm in about 1965, in the form of a beautiful song by Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach. Many of you know it. At that time I imagined that "אשׂא“ was some kind of future tense. But it isn't. The verb is "נָשָׂא" which is a Lamedh 'Aleph verb, and the form "אֶשָׂא" is its imperfect. No particular tense is implied: it is an ongoing action in the past, present, or future. When translated into Greek, Latin, and English, there has been no agreement as to tense. At this point, we have to depend on context, and the sensibilities of the translator. This is one of the reasons for differing translations.
I choose to translate the Psalm as follows:
I lift my eyes to the hills--
from where will my help come?
[This is simple and direct, and the language more or less contemporary. The second verb is also in the imperfect, with the same tense choices as before. But the next verb, which is only understood, has to be "is:"]
My help is from the Lord,
who made the heavens and the earth.
He will not let your foot slip,
he who keeps you will not sleep.
Behold, he who guards Israel
will neither slumber nor sleep.
[We don't use the word "behold" anymore, but we do understand it. It's the usual translation of "הִנֵה" and "see" didn't feel quite right, at least to me.]
(to be continued)
Can't we just "go back to the original Hebrew?" No, we can't, because 1) We don't HAVE the "original" Hebrew, dating from, I don't know, about 900 BCE--it has not survived; and 2) Biblical Hebrew does not even have tenses in the sense that modern European languages have them. It has perfect, indicating that an action is complete, and imperfect, indicating that the action is continuous or ongoing (in past, present, or future). There are other forms, but they are not tenses.
I first learned this Psalm in about 1965, in the form of a beautiful song by Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach. Many of you know it. At that time I imagined that "אשׂא“ was some kind of future tense. But it isn't. The verb is "נָשָׂא" which is a Lamedh 'Aleph verb, and the form "אֶשָׂא" is its imperfect. No particular tense is implied: it is an ongoing action in the past, present, or future. When translated into Greek, Latin, and English, there has been no agreement as to tense. At this point, we have to depend on context, and the sensibilities of the translator. This is one of the reasons for differing translations.
I choose to translate the Psalm as follows:
I lift my eyes to the hills--
from where will my help come?
[This is simple and direct, and the language more or less contemporary. The second verb is also in the imperfect, with the same tense choices as before. But the next verb, which is only understood, has to be "is:"]
My help is from the Lord,
who made the heavens and the earth.
He will not let your foot slip,
he who keeps you will not sleep.
Behold, he who guards Israel
will neither slumber nor sleep.
[We don't use the word "behold" anymore, but we do understand it. It's the usual translation of "הִנֵה" and "see" didn't feel quite right, at least to me.]
(to be continued)
Friday, November 23, 2018
Translating Psalm 121 - I
This morning I re-posted the following, from June 19 2017:
I have not yet translated Psalm 120 (121), but when I do, I'll have a decision to make. In the first verse, we have either:
I will lift up my eyes to the mountains.
from whence my help will come,
or
I will lift up my eyes to the mountains,
from whence will my help come?
A friend of mine had a father who absolutely loved the mountains of his native Switzerland, and this was his favorite psalm. He no doubt knew it in the first of these forms. Emotionally, I have to agree with him, since the mountains are very special to me, too. But the decision as to which version to use must be made on some other basis.
I began by looking at the Hebrew. The word that the KJV translates as "whence" is "me'ayin." It can be used interrogatively or relatively. But, going through all occurrences in Strong's Concordance, I found that it was usually interrogative; for relatives, other constructions were used most of the time.
In the Greek of the Septuagint, the word is "pothen." Again, it can be either interrogative or relative. The oldest manuscripts (I checked the Codex Sinaiticus, for example), had no punctuation here to guide us. Some modern editors, such as Rahlf, did put in a question mark.
In Latin, the word is "unde," and again, it can be either interrogative or relative. So why did the KJV translate it relatively? Those translators claimed to be working from the Hebrew, but we know that they were extremely influenced by the Latin of the Vulgate, where the word is translated in its relative sense. In those days, neither Latin nor Greek really gave any clue as to which meaning was intended.
I even checked the Syriac of the Peshitta, which is hard on these old eyes. Again, no special punctuation.
The most modern of my Latin translations (dating from 1945), put a question mark there. That translation has been very influential with modern English translations, so it is no surprise that they put in a question mark, too.
Going to my JPS Tanakh, I found that they had put in a question mark, too. Remembering my test with Strong's Concordance, and believing that no one is likely to understand Hebrew better than Jews, I decided to opt for the question mark. And that is, basically, how these things are done.
I have not yet translated Psalm 120 (121), but when I do, I'll have a decision to make. In the first verse, we have either:
I will lift up my eyes to the mountains.
from whence my help will come,
or
I will lift up my eyes to the mountains,
from whence will my help come?
A friend of mine had a father who absolutely loved the mountains of his native Switzerland, and this was his favorite psalm. He no doubt knew it in the first of these forms. Emotionally, I have to agree with him, since the mountains are very special to me, too. But the decision as to which version to use must be made on some other basis.
I began by looking at the Hebrew. The word that the KJV translates as "whence" is "me'ayin." It can be used interrogatively or relatively. But, going through all occurrences in Strong's Concordance, I found that it was usually interrogative; for relatives, other constructions were used most of the time.
In the Greek of the Septuagint, the word is "pothen." Again, it can be either interrogative or relative. The oldest manuscripts (I checked the Codex Sinaiticus, for example), had no punctuation here to guide us. Some modern editors, such as Rahlf, did put in a question mark.
In Latin, the word is "unde," and again, it can be either interrogative or relative. So why did the KJV translate it relatively? Those translators claimed to be working from the Hebrew, but we know that they were extremely influenced by the Latin of the Vulgate, where the word is translated in its relative sense. In those days, neither Latin nor Greek really gave any clue as to which meaning was intended.
I even checked the Syriac of the Peshitta, which is hard on these old eyes. Again, no special punctuation.
The most modern of my Latin translations (dating from 1945), put a question mark there. That translation has been very influential with modern English translations, so it is no surprise that they put in a question mark, too.
Going to my JPS Tanakh, I found that they had put in a question mark, too. Remembering my test with Strong's Concordance, and believing that no one is likely to understand Hebrew better than Jews, I decided to opt for the question mark. And that is, basically, how these things are done.
So now we've answered the question about the question. But we are still far from out of the woods. This Psalm well illustrates many of the problems that a translator faces.
In the lines I quoted above, I used the future tense. The RSV uses the present tense. The Greek of the Septuagint (LXX), uses a past tense for "lifted up," and a future tense for "will come." The Vulgate is a special case, because it includes two translations of the Psalms, one "from the Septuagint," and the other "from Hebrew." The first of the two was translated into Latin by St. Jerome himself, from the Greek, and the second was done with the help of a Jewish informant, from an unpointed Hebrew text, older by at least a couple of centuries than any manuscript we have of the pointed, Masoretic text. Both of those translations use a past and a future, like the Septuagint. It is worth noting that the Greek Septuagint was translated by highly educated Jews of Alexandria, at a time when even better Hebrew texts would have been available. These are all considerations. and may come into play at some point.
My JPS Tanakh, a modern Hebrew Bible based on the Masoretic text, uses present and future to translate this verse into English. How do we solve this?
Can't we just "go back to the original Hebrew?" No, we can't, because 1) We don't HAVE the "original" Hebrew, dating from, I don't know, about 900 BCE--it has not survived; and 2) Biblical Hebrew does not even have tenses in the sense that modern European languages have them. It has perfect, indicating that an action is complete, and imperfect, indicating that the action is continuous or ongoing (in past, present, or future). There are other forms, but they are not tenses.
So what do we do?
(to be continued)
Tuesday, November 20, 2018
The Layers of Matthew - X
אבינו יתקדש שמך ויתברך מלכותך רצונך יהיה עשוי בשמים ובארץ ׃
ותתן לחמנו תמידית ׃
ומחול לנו חטאתינו כאשר אנחנו מוחלים לחוטאים לנו
ואל תביאנו לידי נסיון ושמרינו מכל רע אמן ׃
Avinu yitkadash shmekha v'yitbarak malkhutekha ritzonkha yihyeh osuy bashamayim uvaaretz.
V'titen lechmenu tamidit.
Umachol lanu cheteteynu kaasher anachnu mochlim lachoteyim lanu.
V'al t'viyenu liydey nisayon v'shamreynu mekol ra ameyn.
Our Father, may your name be sanctified,
and may your kingdom be blessed.
May your will be done
in the heavens and on earth.
Give us our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
as we forgive
those who sin against us.
And do not lead us into
the power of temptation,
but keep us from all evil.
Amen.
The above is from Hebrew Matthew, as preserved for us by Shem-tob ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut. It is arguably the oldest form of the Our Father, or Avinu, that has come down to us. I also think it is the most beautiful. May it be a blessing to us all.
V'titen lechmenu tamidit.
Umachol lanu cheteteynu kaasher anachnu mochlim lachoteyim lanu.
V'al t'viyenu liydey nisayon v'shamreynu mekol ra ameyn.
Our Father, may your name be sanctified,
and may your kingdom be blessed.
May your will be done
in the heavens and on earth.
Give us our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
as we forgive
those who sin against us.
And do not lead us into
the power of temptation,
but keep us from all evil.
Amen.
The above is from Hebrew Matthew, as preserved for us by Shem-tob ben-Isaac ben-Shaprut. It is arguably the oldest form of the Our Father, or Avinu, that has come down to us. I also think it is the most beautiful. May it be a blessing to us all.
I'm pleased to announce that this blog has now passed the milestone of 49,000 visits. Of course, it's no longer all poetry, as I've been concentrating lately on expository writing. The prime example of this is my series "The Layers of Matthew," currently in nine parts.
I like to take material that is inherently complex and technical, and make it comprehensible to non-specialists. Hopefully, some specialists will still be able to relate. What I really like, though, is to publish content, no matter what the genre, that reminds us where we have come from, and that we are all sisters and brothers. May this series, and other writings to come, do just that.
Thank you all for your interest and encouragement.
I like to take material that is inherently complex and technical, and make it comprehensible to non-specialists. Hopefully, some specialists will still be able to relate. What I really like, though, is to publish content, no matter what the genre, that reminds us where we have come from, and that we are all sisters and brothers. May this series, and other writings to come, do just that.
Thank you all for your interest and encouragement.
Monday, November 19, 2018
The Layers of Matthew - IX
We go next to Matthew VI:9, which is parallel to Luke XI:2, The Our Father/Pater Noster/Avinu. This is not the first time I've written about this prayer. Here's what I wrote four years ago, before I had come to my "Layered Matthew Hypothesis," and therefore also before I really understood the textual relationship between Matthew and Luke:
Some claim that the Pater Noster is taken from the third, fifth, sixth, ninth, and fifteenth blessings of the Amidah, or Shemoneh Esrei, the central prayer of the synagogue liturgy, which is recited by observant Jews three times a day. Certainly there are similarities. I have seen it claimed that Rabbi Yeshua was not the only itinerant Rabbi who taught a "boiled-down" version of the Amidah at that time. I'll take no position on these claims, since I haven't had time to research them. What I will say is that the Pater Noster (let's start calling it the Avinu) is very, very striking in Hebrew.
Avinu shebashamayim yitkadash shmecha
"Yitkadash shmecha." Let Your name be made holy. Because from this blessing all the others will flow. A world in which the Name is revered and respected, will be a world in which all Life is revered and respected, and in which we respect each other. It is a path to a better world.
Tavo malchutecha
May your kingdom come. (Replacing the rule of unethical imposters and usurpers who poison our existence because of their greed and lust for power.)
Yeaseh ritzoncha kmo bashamayim ken baaretz
May your will be done as in the heavens, so also on the earth.
Et-lechem chuqenu ten-lanu hayom
Give us this day our daily bread
Us'lach-lanu et-chovotenu kaasher salachnu gam-anachnu l'chayavenu
Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors
V'al-t'viyenu liydey nisayon kiy im-chaltzenu min-hara'
And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil,
[Kiy l'cha hamamlakhah v'hag'vurah v'hatipheret l'ol'mey olamiym] amen
[for Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.] Amen.
That is well and good, but we are now in a position to determine the original form of the prayer, as taught by Rabbi Yeshua.
As George Howard points out on p. 202 of Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, the Shaprut Hebrew Matthew and the oldest and best manuscripts of Luke agree that "who art in heaven" was not originally part of the prayer, According to my hypothesis, Luke used an early form of Matthew (Matthew I), which was probably written in Hebrew, for the sayings portion of his Gospel. Thus, although Matthew I has not survived, it is reflected in Luke. The Shaprut Hebrew Matthew reflects Matthew II, an intermediate form of Matthew. So, if we want to see the original form of the Lord's Prayer, or Avinu, the best that we can do is to go to Luke XI:2. In the RSV, it goes like this:
Father, hallowed be thy name.
Thy kingdom come.
Give us each day our daily bread;
and forgive us our sins,
for we ourselves forgive everyone
who is indebted to us.
and lead us not into temptation.
Here is how it sounds in Hebrew, in the Salkinson translation:
avinu yitkadash shmecha
tavo malchutecha
ten-lanu lechem chukenu yom b'yomo.
us'lach lanu et-ashmoteynu
ki gam-anachnu solchim l'kol-asher
asham lanu
v'al-t'viyenu liy'dey nisayon.
And here's how it looks in Hebrew, in the form given in the Shaprut Hebrew Matthew, reflecting Matthew II, which is still older than canonical Matthew (Matthew III):
אבינו יתקדש שמך ויתברך מלכותך רצונך יהיה עשוי בשמיםובארץ ׃
ותתן לחמנו תמידית ׃
ומחול לנו חטאתינו כאשר אנחנו מוחלים לחוטאים לנו
ואל תביאנו לידי נסיון ושמרינו מכל רע אמן ׃
The best texts of Luke just say "Father," but here we are back to "Our Father," which is also how Salkinson translated the Luke. Other than that, the main difference between this and Luke is that it says "may your name be sanctified; may your kingdom be blessed." This makes for a more beautiful parallelism. I prefer it for this reason, and also because, as we are told in the Gospel of Thomas, the kingdom of heaven is already among us.
(to be continued)