For
the Talmud readily admits – in facts praises – the translation for making
‘changes’ to the Torah’s Hebrew wording in 14 locations for the sake of
clarity and to avoid misconceptions and heresy.
Megillah 9a-9b and its Source
The Talmud goes into great detail on these 14 ‘changes’. It cites the Hebrew original Torah wording and what was instead written in the Septuagint. This is followed up with a clear and detailed explanation of why each ‘change’ was a good idea and necessary. These rationales are presented as ‘fact’ – unlike the usual rabbinic debates on almost every item – indicating the rationale portion was also part of the original source text used by the Talmud.
Unfortunately,
the Talmud is silent as to the name of the person who created this important
comparison, the name of his treatise or book, and when and where the
comparative analysis was done.
All
the Talmud was doing was passing on these ‘changes’ and giving them the
Talmud’s endorsement.
The
Source’s Process
The majority of the 14 ‘changes’ the Talmud highlights would not instantly jump out at a reader even if familiar with the Hebrew original and its 5,845 verses and 79,976 words.[i]
For
the author of these comparisons to be able to isolate these few changes would
have required a major undertaking.
He would
have had to do the following:
1.
Obtain a copy of the Greek Septuagint.
2.
Obtain a Hebrew Torah scroll.
3.
Be an expert in reading ancient Greek and be an expert in the more
challenging Hebrew of a Torah scroll.
Torah scrolls only show the consonant letters. The proper ‘vowel’ sounds
had always been passed on by oral tradition training.
4.
Decide on a simple marking system to show when ‘changes’
appear. E.g., underlining or placing a
dot at the start and at the end of the change.
5.
Create a comparison chart of the Hebrew and Greek in parallel –
side by side – columns: verse by verse.
For all of the Torah’s 5,845 verses.
6.
Include a third column to verbalize the changes and offer an
explanation/rationale (I.e., the Talmud’s quotes.)
7.
Publication of the work as a scroll or codex (book).
As can be seen
from the above, this is a massive task and must have been very time
consuming.
The resultant Hebrew-Greek comparison would have been far longer than any Torah scroll or filled a very thick Codex (book).
Just the parallel Hebrew-Greek verses would have created a scroll on parchment or papyrus sheets at least twice as long as a Torah scroll. And the rationales re: ‘changes’ required another column and probably were summarized as a ‘final chapter’ or published separately as a ‘booklet’.
It is a truly remarkable story in itself, but one long lost.
Parallels?
The early Christian scholar, Origen of Alexandria (died c. 253 CE) created the Hexapla to better understand and identify ‘correct’ Greek translations of the Hebrew as he well knew the Septuagint of his day had been ‘adjusted’ over time and was not always a correct and faithful translation.[ii] He read and understood Biblical Hebrew and had access to Torah and Nach scrolls.
The Hexapla’s parallel columns compared the Hebrew original with the (contemporary) Septuagint and three more recent Greek translations – word by word[iii].
The three others were by Aquila of Sinope, a convert to Judaism and student of Rabbi Akiva (c. 130 CE)[iv] , by a Jewish scholar known as Theodotion (c. 150 CE)[v] and by Symmachus, another convert to Judaism (late 2nd century CE).[vi]
Each of these later Jewish translations were highly regarded[vii], but only the Septuagint has survived.
Origen’s project – covering the entire Hebrew Canon or Tanach – took almost 30 years.[viii]
It
was stored in the library of the Church of Caesarea where Origen had worked.[ix]
Origen never published a ‘revised/corrected’ copy of the Septuagint text. [x]
All he left behind was the Hexapla with notation marks to show where the (contemporary) Septuagint text had additions and variations compared to the Hebrew Torah scroll that he had access to.[xi]
But in 331 CE, Emperor Constantine the Great ordered Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea to produce 50 copies of the Septuagint for distribution across the Roman Empire. Eusebius was aware of Origen’s Hexapla project stored at Caesarea and used Origen annotated Septuagint as the prototype.
This so-called Origen Septuagint became the source of the 50 copies and three of the oldest surviving Septuagint manuscripts used for today’s Septuagint texts.[xii]
Origen
never tried to ‘explain’ or rationalize any differences between the Hebrew and
the Septuagint.
Only
the author of the Megillah 9a-9b passages took this last step.
Review
of the Talmud’s ’14 changes’
In Megillah 9a and 9b, the Talmud goes systematically through 14 ‘changes’ that were introduced into the Greek and which the Talmud lauds as preventing misunderstanding of the Holy Hebrew text and some of which could possibly have led to heretical views.
Below,
each of the ’changes’ is analysed with the quotation from the Talmud, the relevant
Hebrew-English Bible verses and the Septuagint Greek text [xiii].
However,
as will be shown later, only three of the Talmud’s claims are fully accurate
and two other claims just half-true.
Lastly,
each ‘change’ that is true is marked YES
Any ‘change’ that does not appear in the Septuagint is marked NO.
Why
this is the case will be discussed at the end.
Talmud list of ‘changes’
1. NO Gen. 1:1 The Talmud states the Greek translation changes the word order and moves God to the start from the middle of the verse – as the Hebrew could be interpreted literally to mean Bereshit created God.
And they wrote: “God created in
the beginning [bereshit]”, reversing the order of the words in the first
phrase in the Torah that could be misinterpreted as: “Bereshit created
God”
Unfortunately, the Talmud is
wrong as the Greek is identical to the Hebrew[xiv].
The Greek for God is Θεὸς and it is in the middle of the verse which
starts with “In the beginning” = Εn ἀρχῇ.
Εn
ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν
2. NO Gen. 1:26 The Talmud states the translation uses the singular instead of the Hebrew plural when referring to God’s creation of mankind.
And they wrote: “I shall make man
in image and in likeness”, rather than: “Let us make man in our image and in
our likeness” as from there too one could mistakenly conclude that there are
multiple powers and that God has human form.
But the
Septuagint uses the plural form for let us = ποιήσωμεν
26 καὶ εἶπεν ὁ Θεός· ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον
3. YES Gen. 2:2 The Talmud states the Hebrew is altered to prevent any suggestion God worked on the Sabbath.
Instead of: “And on the seventh
day God concluded His work” which could have been understood as though some of
His work was completed on Shabbat itself, they wrote: “And on the sixth day He
concluded His work, and He rested on the seventh day”.
The Hebrew is:
|
ב וַיְכַל אֱלֹהִים בַּיּוֹם
הַשְּׁבִיעִי, מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה; וַיִּשְׁבֹּת בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי,
מִכָּל-מְלַאכְתּוֹ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה. |
2 And on the seventh day God
finished His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day
from all His work which He had made. |
The Talmud is correct
as the Greek states: “God completed His work on the sixth day = ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἕκτῃ.
2 καὶ συνετέλεσεν ὁ Θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἕκτῃ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, ἃ ἐποίησε, καὶ κατέπαυσε τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἔργων αὐτοῦ, ὧν ἐποίησε.
4. NO Gen. 5:2 The Talmud states the Greek uses the singular “him” instead of the Hebrew “them” to avoid confusion: as the first human was a single person – Adam, as stated in Gen. 1:27.
They also wrote: “Male and female
He created him”, and they did not write as it is written in the Torah: “Male
and female He created them” to avoid the impression that there is a
contradiction between this verse and the verse: “And God created man” (Genesis 1:27), which indicates that God
created one person.
The Septuagint text matches the Hebrew
exactly, so the Talmud is mistaken.
It uses the plural for ‘them’
= αὐτοὺς THREE
TIMES as in the Hebrew.
|
ב זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה, בְּרָאָם; וַיְבָרֶךְ
אֹתָם, וַיִּקְרָא אֶת-שְׁמָם אָדָם, בְּיוֹם, הִבָּרְאָם. |
2 male and female created He them, and blessed them,
and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. |
2 ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτοὺς καὶ εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς· καὶ ἐπωνόμασε τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ᾿Αδάμ, ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς
5. NO Gen. 11:7 The Talmud states the Greek switches to the singular from the Hebrew plural to avoid anyone thinking there is more than one God.
Instead of: “Come, let us go down,
and there confound their language” which indicates multiple authorities, they
wrote in the singular: “Come, let me go down, and there confound their
language.”
This too is incorrect as the Greek
uses the plural “ let US” = καταβάντες[xv]
7 δεῦτε καὶ καταβάντες συγχέωμεν αὐτῶν ἐκεῖ τὴν γλῶσσαν, ἵνα μὴ ἀκούσωσιν ἕκαστος τὴν φωνὴν τοῦ πλησίον.
In addition, they
replaced the verse: “And Sarah laughed within herself [bekirba]”, with: “And
Sarah laughed among her relatives [bikroveha].” They made this change to
distinguish between Sarah’s laughter, which God criticized, and Abraham’s
laughter, to which no reaction is recorded. Based on the change, Sarah’s
laughter was offensive because she voiced it to others.
|
יב וַתִּצְחַק שָׂרָה, בְּקִרְבָּהּ לֵאמֹ |
|
The Septuagint Greek, however, is an exact copy of the Hebrew:
ἐν ἑαυτῇ = in herself.
12
ἐγέλασε δὲ Σάρρα ἐν ἑαυτῇ, λέγουσα
7. NO Gen. 49:6 The Talmud states the Greek reverses the two halves of the verse and replaces the words “murdered a man” in Jacob’s deathbed words to his sons with “uprooted a trough”.
They also altered the
verse: “For in their anger they slew a man and in their self-will they
slaughtered an ox” to read: For in their anger they slew an ox and in their
self-will they uprooted a trough, to avoid
the charge that Jacob’s sons were murderers.
This also is incorrect
as the Greek copies the Hebrew word for word and makes no changes to clause
order. ἀνθρώπους = man, and ταῦρον = ox.
ὅτι ἐν τῷ θυμῷ αὐτῶν ἀπέκτειναν ἀνθρώπους καὶ ἐν τῇ ἐπιθυμίᾳ αὐτῶν ἐνευροκόπησαν ταῦρον.
8.
Exod. 4:20 The Talmud states the Greek replaced the
word “donkey’ with a vaguer “carrier of people” as the donkey is a lowly
animal.
Instead
of: “And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon a donkey” they
wrote: “And Moses took his wife and his sons, and set them upon a carrier of people”,
which could be understood as referring to a horse or a camel rather than the
lowly donkey.
The Greek
agrees with the Talmud. ὑποζύγια means beasts of burden. It, however, uses the plural. After all, 3 people were to be transported by
Moses: his wife and 2 sons.
αὐτὰ ἐπὶ τὰ ὑποζύγια καὶ ἐπέστρεψεν εἰς Αἴγυπτον
9. YES/NO Exod. 12:40 The Talmud states the Greek did not repeat the idea that the Hebrews lived in Egypt for 430 as stated but reduced the number to 400 years and added “also in other lands”.
Instead of: “And the residence of
the children of Israel, who resided in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty
years” which, when read literally is imprecise, for they did not dwell in Egypt
that long, they wrote: “And the residence of the children of Israel, who
resided in Egypt and in other lands, was four hundred years.”
The Talmud is half right. The Greek adds “and Canaan” to the time
period but keeps the 430 year figure.
I.e., It understands the Hebrew’s 430 years to include the earlier time
in Canaan before the move to Egypt.
γῇ Χαναάν = in Canaan and ἔτη τετρακόσια τριάκοντα = 430 years
40 ἡ δὲ κατοίκησις τῶν υἱῶν ᾿Ισραήλ, ἣν κατῴκησαν ἐν γῇ Αἰγύπτῳ καὶ ἐν γῇ Χαναάν, ἔτη τετρακόσια τριάκοντα.
10. YES/NO Exod. 24:5 and 24:11 The Talmud states the Greek replaced the word “youth” with the more respectful “elect”.
Instead of: “And he sent the youth of the children of Israel, who brought
burnt-offerings” which evokes the question of why young men were sent to
perform that service, they wrote: “And he sent the elect [za’atutei] of
the children of Israel.” The same term was substituted again several verses
later, rendering the verse: “And upon the nobles of the children of Israel He
laid not His hand” (Exodus 24:11) as: “And upon the elect of the children of
Israel He laid not His hand.”
The Talmud is again half
correct. Verse 24:5 keeps the
Hebrew “youths” but 24:11 uses “chosen ones”.
νεανίσκους means ‘young men’, while ἐπιλέκτων means ‘chosen ones’
5 καὶ ἐξαπέστειλε τοὺς νεανίσκους τῶν υἱῶν ᾿Ισραήλ
11 καὶ τῶν ἐπιλέκτων τοῦ ᾿Ισραὴλ
11. YES Numb. 16:15 The Talmud states the Greek replaced the word ‘donkey’ with ‘any item’ to show he was always honest.
Instead of Moses’ assertion: “I
have not taken one donkey [ḥamor] from them” they wrote in more general
terms: “I have not taken one item of value [ḥemed] from them,” to prevent
the impression that Moses took other items.
The Hebrew is:
|
וַיִּחַר לְמֹשֶׁה, מְאֹד, וַיֹּאמֶר
אֶל-יְהוָה, אַל-תֵּפֶן אֶל-מִנְחָתָם; לֹא חֲמוֹר
אֶחָד מֵהֶם, נָשָׂאתִי, וְלֹא הֲרֵעֹתִי, אֶת-אַחַד מֵהֶם. |
15 And Moses was very wroth, and
said unto the LORD: 'Respect not Thou their offering; I have not taken one ass from them, neither have I hurt one
of them.' |
The Greek agrees with the Talmud as hemed literally means desirable
item. (As in the 10th Mount Sinai Stone Tablets Commandment.)
15 καὶ ἐβαρυθύμησε Μωυσῆς σφόδρα καὶ εἶπε πρὸς Κύριον· μὴ πρόσχῃς εἰς τὴν θυσίαν αὐτῶν· οὐκ ἐπιθύμημα οὐδενὸς αὐτῶν εἴληφα, οὐδὲ ἐκάκωσα οὐδένα αὐτῶν.
15 And Moses was exceeding indignant, and said to
the Lord, Do thou take no heed to their sacrifice: I have not taken away [what they] desire
of any one of them, neither
have I hurt any one of them.
12. NO Deut. 4:19 The Talmud states a clarification was added that the Sun and Moon are only sources of light, so gentiles would not think the Torah says non-Jews should worship the Sun and the Moon.
To the verse that discusses the
worship of the sun and the moon, about which it is written: “Which the Lord
your God has allotted to all the nations” they added a word to make it read: “Which
the Lord your God has allotted to give light to all the nations,” to prevent
the potential misinterpretation that the heavenly bodies were given to the
gentiles so that they may worship them.
The Hebrew is:
|
יט וּפֶן-תִּשָּׂא עֵינֶיךָ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה, וְרָאִיתָ
אֶת-הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְאֶת-הַיָּרֵחַ וְאֶת-הַכּוֹכָבִים כֹּל צְבָא הַשָּׁמַיִם,
וְנִדַּחְתָּ וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתָ לָהֶם, וַעֲבַדְתָּם--אֲשֶׁר חָלַק יְהוָה
אֱלֹהֶיךָ, אֹתָם, לְכֹל הָעַמִּים, תַּחַת כָּל-הַשָּׁמָיִם. |
19 and lest thou lift up thine
eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun and the moon and the stars,
even all the host of heaven, thou be drawn away and worship them, and serve
them, which the LORD thy God hath allotted unto all the peoples under the whole
heaven. |
The Greek, however, is
identical to the Hebrew. There is no
inserted “to give light” to all the nations.
19 καὶ μὴ ἀναβλέψας εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ ἰδὼν τὸν ἥλιον καὶ τὴν σελήνην
καὶ τοὺς ἀστέρας καὶ πάντα τὸν κόσμον τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, πλανηθεὶς προσκυνήσῃς αὐτοῖς
καὶ λατρεύσῃς αὐτοῖς, ἃ ἀπένειμε Κύριος ὁ Θεός σου αὐτὰ πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι τοῖς ὑποκάτω
τοῦ οὐρανοῦ.
19 and lest having looked up to the sky, and having seen the
sun and the moon and the stars, and all the heavenly bodies, thou shouldest go
astray and worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God has distributed
to all the nations under heaven.
13. NO Deut. 17: 3 The Talmud states extra words are added at the end: “to serve them” to stress God is the one who created the Sun and Moon and stars. I.e., they did not pre-exist.
The verse: “And has
gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or the moon,
or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded” could be understood
as indicating that God did not command their existence, i.e., these entities
created themselves. Therefore, when these Elders translated the verse they
added a word to the end of the verse to make it read: Which I have not
commanded to serve them.
The Hebrew
is:
|
ג וַיֵּלֶךְ, וַיַּעֲבֹד אֱלֹהִים
אֲחֵרִים, וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ, לָהֶם; וְלַשֶּׁמֶשׁ אוֹ לַיָּרֵחַ, אוֹ לְכָל-צְבָא
הַשָּׁמַיִם--אֲשֶׁר לֹא-צִוִּיתִי. |
3 and hath gone and served other
gods, and worshipped them, or the sun, or the moon, or any of the host of
heaven, which I have commanded not; |
3 καὶ ἐλθόντες λατρεύσωσι θεοῖς ἑτέροις καὶ προσκυνήσωσιν αὐτοῖς,
τῷ ἡλίῳ ἢ τῇ σελήνῃ ἢ παντὶ τῶν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ἃ οὐ προσέξατέ σοι,
ἃ οὐ προσέξατέ σοι, means literally “which not did I assign to you”.
14. NO Leviticus 11: 6 The Talmud states the Greek replaced the Hebrew word for ‘rabbit’ with ‘short legged beast’ as Ptolemy’s wife’s name sounded like Hebrew ‘rabbit’. This would avoid insulting Pharaoh Ptolemy’s wife.
And in the list of unclean
animals, they wrote for him: The short-legged beast [tze’irat
haraglayim]. And they did not write for him: “And the hare [arnevet]” , since the name of Ptolemy’s wife was
Arnevet, so that he would not say: The Jews have mocked me and inserted my
wife’s name in the Torah. Therefore, they did not refer to the hare by name,
but by one of its characteristic features.
The Hebrew is:
|
ו וְאֶת-הָאַרְנֶבֶת,
כִּי-מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה הִוא, וּפַרְסָה, לֹא הִפְרִיסָה; טְמֵאָה הִוא, לָכֶם. |
6 And the hare, because she cheweth the cud but parteth not
the hoof, she is unclean unto you. |
The
Greek is
6 καὶ τὸν χοιρογρύλλιον, ὅτι οὐκ ἀνάγει μηρυκισμὸν τοῦτο, καὶ ὁπλὴν οὐ
διχηλεῖ, ἀκάθαρτον τοῦτο ὑμῖν·
χοιρογρύλλιον means ‘hare’ or ‘rabbit’, so the Talmud’s ‘change’ does not exist.
It is pronounced choirogrúllion[xvi] with the CH having, in ancient Greek, a KH sound. [xvii]
While the Talmud is wrong as choirogrúllion is the Greek word for ‘rabbit’, the rationale does ‘make sense’ if the Greek translation were seen as a transliteration of the Hebrew ‘euphemism’: as Greek choirogrúllion sounds similar to the Hebrew tze’irat haraglayim.
Yes, TZ could be pronounced similar to χ = KH in ancient Greek, and Hebrew raglayim resembles Greek grúllion.
Therefore, it seems to me, the author of this
‘change’ had before him a correct Greek choirogrúllion text, but
incorrectly assumed the Greek word was a ‘transliteration’ from the Hebrew.
Also,
surprisingly, this ‘change’ list source did not notice the same issue arises in
Deut. 14:7 where ‘rabbit’ is again listed as an unclean animal.
The Septuagint
Greek for Deut. 14:7 again uses χοιρογρύλλιον.
As for a wife
whose name sounds similar to the Hebrew for rabbit, arnevet, there is Artakama who was the Persian first
wife of Ptolemy Soter – a marriage arranged by Alexander the Great. Soter abandoned her soon after Alexander’s
death when he returned west to become ruler of Egypt. She never bore him any children[xviii].
A more likely
‘match’ is the name Arsinoe.
Especially if the Hebrew final ‘eT’ is pronounced as in Ashkenazi
tradition ‘Os’.[xix]
Pharoah Ptolemy
II Philadelphus married a woman named Arsinoe I and after their divorce he
married his sister also named Arsinoe II.
She ruled as co-pharaoh.[xx]
So, the idea that
there was a queen of Egypt with a name similar to the Hebrew for ‘rabbit’ seems
very possible – depending on how “Arsinoe” would have been pronounced.
Later on, there will be much more on the name Arsinoe.
Of
the 14 ‘changes’ the Talmud states occurred in the Septuagint Greek,
only three are fully correct (above #3, #8, and #11) and two half-correct (#9
and #10).
All
the rest – 9 others – are simply not found in the Septuagint
Greek as transmitted over the millennia since Origen.
The
14 changes fall into three distinct categories: theological, consistency and
what can best be called ‘personal honour and reputation”.
Theology - ‘Changes’ #1, #2, #5, #12 and #13 - five in all – are to
prevent heresy.
I.e.,
To ensure readers understand that there is only one God and He alone is the
creator of everything in the universe. And all peoples should only worship
Him.
Consistency – ‘Changes’ #3, #4 and #9 recognize
the Hebrew text could be seen as ‘inconsistent’ as God did NOT work on the
Shabbat (#3), there was only a single ‘first human” (#4) and the Jews did not
(according to rabbinic tradition) live in Egypt for 430 years (#9).
Personal honour and reputation - ‘Changes’ #6 on Sarah’s laughter is really
there to defend Abraham’s laughter.
‘Changes’ #8 and #11 are to avoid defaming Moses: first his use of a
lowly donkey and, second, his honesty.
‘Change’ #7 is to avoid calling Jacob’s sons murderers. ‘Change’ #10 is
simply to make selecting ‘youth’ sound more august.
And
‘change’ #14 is to avoid defaming the Pharoah’s wife.
It is noteworthy that #14 re: Ptolemy’s wife, is listed last. Logically, it should have been in the middle of the listing as the quote is from Leviticus 11:6 and the rest of the listing goes chronologically from Genesis through Deuteronomy.
Its ‘out-of-order’ location is probably due to the fact that she was the pagan wife of a non-Jewish pharaoh -- as all the other listed ‘changes’ relate to God and Jews.
CONCLUSION
Of the key theological ‘changes’ re: God, NONE exist in the Septuagint.
On the important issue of the length of the Israelites’ stay in Egypt (#9), the Septuagint reflects rabbinic tradition only partly --by adding that the Torah’s number of 430 includes the time in Canaan beforehand.
All
else is simply NOT found in the Septuagint as passed on for the last two
millennia.
Why so many ‘wrongs’?
As
stated at the outset of Part I, it is remarkable that the Talmud in far off
Babylonia (complied c. 500 CE) and its
rabbis knew anything about the Septuagint Chumash portion translated
into foreign Greek in far off Egypt some 700 years before.
And,
as argued above, the ’14 changes’ where not compiled or researched by the
Talmud but produced by some unknown bilingual Hebrew-Greek expert beforehand.
All
the Talmud had, it seems, was a summary of these few ‘differences’ from his
extensive cross-comparison of all 5,845 verses and 79,976 words of the Chumash.
The
Talmud ‘trusted’ this unnamed source and merely repeated his findings.
When and Where?
Linking a Pharoah’s wife to the Torah’s word for ‘unclean rabbit’ only becomes a concern if the list of ‘changes’ was created in Egypt and during the reign of a Ptolemy linked to an Arsinoe as queen.
Ptolemy
II Philadelphus – who is the royal believed to have commissioned the Septuagint
– was married to two women named Arsinoe: Arsinoe I and her replacement, the
co-Pharoah Arsinoe II.
Ptolemy II ruled from 284 to 246.[xxi] Arsinoe I was his wife at his inauguration and until he divorced her – i.e., 284- to c. 277 BCE
Asinoe II reigned as co-pharaoh c. 277 to 270 BCE.[xxii]
It is also possible that the insult of ‘rabbit’ would be an
issue after Ptolemy II Philadelphus died, for his successor was his son Ptolemy
III Euergetes (246-222 BCE) who was the
son of Arsinoe I – yes, the first Arsinoe.[xxiii]
Ptolemy VI Philometor (ruled 180-145 BCE) was the grandson of Ptolemy IV and Arsinoe III. His queen was Cleopatra II.
The pharaohs thereafter: Ptolemies VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII and the last
male pharaoh Ptolemy XIV (47-44 BCE) all married women named Cleopatra[xxvii].
However, for
a brief year or year and a half, Ptolemy XIII Philopator was married his other
sister Arsinoe IV, but
the marriage and revolt ended with his death in 47 BCE.[xxviii]
The
last male ruler, Ptolemy XIV, son of Ptolemy XII Auletes,[xxix]
would not have been offended by any ‘unclean rabbit’ reading for Arsinoe as
Arsinoe IV was not his kin and she was seen as a short-lived rebel and traitor.
So,
any Pharaoh with a wife or mother or grandmother named Arsinoe: from 284 BCE
down to a 145 BCE, would have been offended.
Arsinoe,
in brief, was the most common name of Ptolemaic queens until the name Cleopatra
became the norm starting with Ptolemy V Epiphanes.
This,
then, is the logical ‘window’ for the creation of the listing of 14 ‘changes’:
from the translation of the Septuagint Chumash portion c. 250 BCE down
to 145 BCE.
Thereafter,
no one would care.
Omissions
The
website http://daatemet.org.il/en/torah-talmud/torah-text/a-comparison-between-the-modern-text-of-genesis-and-the-septuagint/ reproduces the research by Prof. Moshe
Tzippor of Bar Ilan University, Israel (2005) on the book of Genesis:
·
There are – in Genesis alone –some 930 extra words/ideas in the Septuagint
while some 450 words/ideas in the Hebrew Masoretic Torah tradition are missing
in the Septuagint.
·
As Torah scroll Hebrew only prints the consonants – so vowel
sounds are to be inserted based on ‘expert oral training’ -- some of the
differences in translation meaning are clearly due to ‘improper’ vowel
sound insertions.
·
Spelling confusion or letter substitution create new meanings.
·
Entire verses and even numerical numbers differ.
Yes,
the reference to resting on the 7th Day as cited in the ’14 changes’
is accurate, but the Talmud list leaves out numerous other ‘differences’
identified by Prof. Tzippor in Genesis: verses 29:8, 30:38, 31:34-35, 36:35,
39:1, 46:27 and 49:21.
Changes
to 46:27: the count of Jacob and his descendants going to Egypt, is enormous. The Septuagint lists Joseph as having
nine (9) sons – not just two (2), and replaces the total of 70 with the number
75.
·
Replacing one term for God with another, or adding such a term to
the Greek where there is none in the Hebrew verse.
(As I have elaborated in the previous blog “The Tetragrammaton: the Hidden name of God”, the Septuagint as transmitted for millennia in the Christian world does not use the 4-letter proper Divine name as found in the Hebrew but rather the metaphor of ADONAI = Lord/master.)
Of its list of
seven ‘changes’ to Genesis, only one is correct: Gen.2:2.
And the Talmud list
misses eight – yes eight – others in Genesis alone. Most notably Gen. 46:27, the number of
Jacobs’ family.
To me, the most shocking omissions in the Talmud list are the major changes to the Decalogue – the so-called 10 commandments given at Mt Sinai – as found in the Septuagint and the related Hebrew Nash Papyrus.
The
changes are presented and discussed in detail in the previous blog “Masoretic
Torah, the Septuagint and Nash Papyrus”.
·
It adds to Commandment #4 re: the Sabbath, “[nor] thy ox nor thy
ass” as in Deut. 5: 13.
·
It lists ‘adultery’ as Commandment #6 instead of #7, and makes
‘murder’ #8 instead of #6. Stealing
switches from #8 to #7 – ahead of murder.
·
Also, it follows Deut. 5:17 and separates out 'coveting a
neighbour's wife' as a first, separate sentence. In Exod. 20: 13, the Mount
Sinai version, the wife is listed in the middle of the husband’s possessions.
The altered
wording and order of the Divine speakings at Mount Sinai as they appear in the Septuagint
(and Hebrew Nash Papyrus): Exod. 20:2-13, would not have been ignored by the
rabbis of the Talmud.
·
The Talmud, way off in Babylon, merely ‘reprinted’ – if gladly and
without cross-checking the Greek – a list of ‘changes’ created by some unknown
scholar.
·
This bilingual scholar probably compiled his full comparison some
time between c.250 BCE -- when the Chumash section of Septuagint was
newly created -- and no later that 145 BCE, when any ‘rabbit’ and Arsinoe
confusion would no longer be of concern.
That is, 600 or more years before the Talmud
Bavli’s compilation.
·
He lived and worked in Egypt or possibly nearby Judea.
·
His rationales were written in Hebrew (rather than Greek). Otherwise, the rabbis of the Babylonian Talmud could not have
understood them.
·
As the Talmud only is aware of 14 ‘changes’, its list is from a fragment
of the original comparison analysis and summary chapter, as passed on and
recopied over hundreds of years.
·
The Talmud and its rabbis were so unfamiliar with the Greek Septuagint
text that they had no idea the ‘changes’ list was mostly ‘incorrect’, and
reflected, at best, only the tip of the iceberg of real changes.
How could a scholar get so many ‘changes’ wrong?
Why
did the bilingual expert get so many of the 14 ‘changes’ wrong?
Especially
when he writes detailed and clear rationales.
I
can only come up with one possibility: a solution that may seem bizarre, but it
is not without precedent in Septuagint history.
Namely,
that the author of the comparison and ‘changes’ list was working with a copy of
the Greek Septuagint that did have all 14 ‘changes’; but that this Septuagint
‘alternate version’ has not survived.
Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 49:6
As
for the #7 ’change’, Gen. 49:6, it claims two alterations that are highly
noticeable: inverting the first and second clauses, and replacing “murdering a
man” with a non-sensical and bizarre “uprooted a trough”.
So,
I believe it is only reasonable to conclude that he was looking at a Septuagint
text that had these very significant alterations in word order and wording.
Other incorrect ‘changes’ re: God and Adam
Similarly, anyone fluent in Greek would have recognized the claimed #4 ‘change’: changing a plural to a singular re: first human – again a pronoun change – did not happen.
And the claimed #12 and #13 ‘changes’: added wording to clarify pagans were not to worship the Sun and the Moon and stars – but only God, must have appeared before the author’s eyes or he would never have mentioned these verse additions.
#12
Deut.4:19 – inserting the phrase “to give light” in mid-sentence: to
stress light as the role of the Sun and Moon.
#13
Deut. 17:3 – End the verse with a new ‘[not] to serve them”.
However, these ‘false claims’ and the fully correct and half-correct ‘changes’ are exactly what a pious, thoughtful Jewish scribe would have done.
Option
A: a Greek translator scribe
The 14 ‘changes’
could have been introduced all at once, or incrementally.
Their introduction
into the Greek could be the work of:
a.
The originally translator assigned to translate the Holy
Hebrew text into Greek c. 250 BCE: to prevent pagan kings, their librarians and
Greek philosophy students from misconstruing the Torah.
OR/AND
b.
A subsequent Jewish scribe copyist, who took it upon
himself to prevent pagans and Hellenized Jews from heretical misreadings and
libelous or insulting misconceptions.
While this option may sound even more bizarre, it is, I believe, a viable option.
The
‘changes’ made to the Decalogue at Mount Sinai were designed to create greater consistency
between the Decalogues of Exod. 20:2-13 and Moses’ repeat in Deut. 5: 6
– 17.
Changes
to prevent ‘critics’ complaining that the two decalogues are from ‘different’
sources and that the Torah is not a single text of God’s words as
dictated to Moses.
Such
concerns: regarding other verses that could be misconstrued and even lead to heretical
views, may well have been in the mind of the Hebrew scribe who wrote this
Hebrew Torah text in Egypt in the late 4th century BCE or early 3rd
century BCE.: the sole Hebrew Torah scroll used for the Septuagint Greek
translation, and which has in part been preserved in the Hebrew Nash Papyrus.
It
would not surprise me if this Hebrew scribe made many other ‘alterations’ in
his Hebrew Torah scroll.
Living
in Egypt during the late fourth or early third centuries and thereafter, would
have been challenging. Since Alexander
the Great’s conquest of Egypt in 332 BCE,[xxx]
Hellenistic Greek language, education, values and philosophical discussions
rushed over Egypt like a Tsunami.
Within
80 years, the Jews of Egypt by and large no longer could read or understand
Hebrew and needed a Greek Torah translation.
It
is, consequently, quite likely that the Greek language was not the only Greek
influence and ‘adaptation’ by the Jews of Egypt.
After
all, Greek math (e.g., Euclid), science and astronomy and biology (e.g.,
Aristotle), medicine (e.g., Hypocrites), literature and theatre (e.g., Homer,
Sophocles), history (Thucydides), geography and anthropology (Herodotus),
naturalistic painting and sculpture (e.g. Venus de Milo), architecture (e.g.,
Parthenon) and philosophy (e.g., Socrates, Plato, Aristotle) all became the
bedrock of all Western civilizations.
And
much of Greek ‘learning’ took place in their Gymnasium – originally
athletic/sports training centres (done in the nude), but long before Alexander
they became simultaneously centres of higher education and socialization as
well.
The
effort by the High Priest of Judea, Jason (175-71 BCE)[xxxi]
to build a gymnasium and stadium in Jerusalem and have Jews participate in its
athletics (in the nude) and even have young (Levites and) Priests participate
in international competitions in honour of one Greek god or another (2
Maccabees 4:7-17) was part of a Hellenization movement that gained support
even in Judea: even within Jerusalem and Temple circles. This clash of cultures
ultimately resulted in Antiochus IV’s anti-Judaism decrees and the Maccabee
revolt of 167 BCE.
It
is, therefore, not unreasonable to envision similar cultural diffusion and
assimilation pressures in Egypt, and the challenge of defending Judaism and
Torah to gentiles and Hellenised, ‘educated’ Jews.
Hiding the proper name of God
But over time – probably under Christian influence --
these were removed and replaced with the word Κύριος -- which simply means master/lord, i.e., the metaphor: ADONAI.[xxxiii]
Onkelos
Yet Onkelos systematically made two changes:
Onkelos, out of respect and piety, does not reproduce the full,
holy 4-letter Divine name, but uses its abbreviation יי. Much later, medieval Masoretic
vowel symbols were added and now it appears in Bible texts as יְיָ .
Here is the
original Hebrew and Onkelos for Gen. 1: 1-5
and Gen. 2:4. The English is
correct as אֱלֹהִים means God.
יְיָ is
properly translated as The Eternal.
|
Gen. 1: 1-5 |
||||||
|
בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת
הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ. ב וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי
תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם. ג וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים,
יְהִי אוֹר; וַיְהִי-אוֹר. ד וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים
אֶת-הָאוֹר, כִּי-טוֹב; וַיַּבְדֵּל אֱלֹהִים,
בֵּין הָאוֹר וּבֵין הַחֹשֶׁךְ. ה וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים
לָאוֹר יוֹם, וְלַחֹשֶׁךְ קָרָא לָיְלָה; וַיְהִי-עֶרֶב וַיְהִי-בֹקֶר, יוֹם
אֶחָד. {פ} |
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 Now the earth was unformed and void,
and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters. 3 And
God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was
light. 4 And
God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And
God called the light Day, and the darkness He
called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. {P} |
קַדְמִין
בְּרָא יְיָ יָת שְׁמַיָּא
וְיָת אַרְעָא וְאַרְעָא הֲוַת צָדְיָא וְרֵיקַנְיָא וַחֲשׁוֹכָא פָּרַשׂ עַל אַפֵּי תְהוֹמָא
וְרוּחָא מִן קֳדָם יְיָ מְנַשְּׁבָא עַל אַפֵּי מַיָּא וַאֲמַר יְיָ יְהֵי נְהוֹרָא
וַהֲוָה נְהוֹרָא וַחֲזָא
יְיָ יָת נְהוֹרָא אֲרֵי טָב וְאַפְרֵשׁ יְיָ
בֵּין נְהוֹרָא וּבֵין חֲשׁוֹכָא וּקְרָא
יְיָ לִנְהוֹרָא יְמָמָא וְלַחֲשׁוֹכָא
קְרָא לֵילְיָא וַהֲוָה רְמַשׁ וַהֲוָה
צְפַר יוֹמָא חָד |
||||
|
Gen. 2: 4 |
||||||
|
4 These are the generations of
the heaven and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the ETERNAL God
made earth and heaven. |
אִלֵּין תּוּלְדַת
שְׁמַיָּא
וְאַרְעָא כַּד אִתְבְּרִיאוּ בְּיוֹמָא דִּי עֲבַד יְיָ אֱלֹהִים אַרְעָא
וּשְׁמַיָּא: |
||||
Only with Gen. 2:4 – when both terms for The Eternal and generic God appear side by side, does Onkelos introduce the term אֱלֹהִים.
2. Onkelos minimizes the Bible’s anthropomorphic Hebrew references to the ‘hand of God’, the ‘outstretched arm of God’, etc. as Judaism holds that The Eternal has no corporeal shape or material whatsoever. E.g., Maimonides “13 Principles of faith”, Principle #3.[xxxiv]
This point re Onkelos was
first brought to my attention by the article at
https://www.britannica.com/topic/biblical-literature/Early-versions .
Whether the ’14 changes’ (and many others) were in the source Hebrew Torah or introduced by the original Greek translator or a second-generation pious Jewish scribe, most of the ‘changes’ were replaced with more exact translations after the comparison ‘list’ referenced in the Talmud was created, i.e., after c. 145 BCE at the latest.
And they certainly disappeared no later that the new ‘authoritative’ 50 copies of the Septuagint that became the Christian ‘standard’ soon after 331 CE.
After all, the
goal of the Origen Septuagint was to restore the original Divine
Hebrew text.
Unfortunately,
the 50 copies that instantly became the Christian ‘standard’ were created by Eusebius
who knew no Hebrew.
Errors of all
kinds were preserved or new ones inadvertently introduced in the Origen
Septuagint copies, but most of the ‘changes’ detailed in the Talmud list were
now gone forever.
It is probably one of these Septuagints that Jerome accessed when he was commissioned to create a Latin translation: only to reject this new Septuagint text as often faulty.
Jerome, unlike Eusebius, had learned Biblical Hebrew and had access to Torah and Nach scrolls.
So, while the Septuagint text that lay before Jerome (and which is still used today), had numerical errors re: Jacob’s offspring in Gen. 46:27: i.e., 9 sons of Joseph and total of 75, Jerome’s Latin Vulgate matches the Hebrew: 2 sons by Joseph and a total count of 70.[xxxv]
The above, seeming tangent, is relevant to the list of ’14 changes’ and the more extensive ‘full’ list now long lost.
As stated before, it makes no sense for someone to ‘concoct’ and give detailed explanations for Septuagint Greek changes that never existed.
Put simply, every one of the ’14 changes’ must have existed in a very early Septuagint text.
Conclusion on the List of 14 ‘changes’
Whether the ‘changes’ were made in the Egyptian Hebrew Torah source text, by the Greek translator c. 250 BCE, or a soon thereafter second-generation copyist, the ‘changes’ were made by someone who was a pious Jew highly concerned to prevent pagan gentiles and Hellenized Jews from misconstruing the Holy Chumash.
I.e., To prevent heretical
ideas re: God. To reject pagan worship of the Sun and Moon and stars.
To protect the
reputation and honour of Jacob’s son, Moses and the people of Israel in
general.
The ‘changes’ removed
Whatever errors Eusebius made in understanding Origen’s Hexapla notations, by the mid-4th century, the ’14 changes’ found in the Talmud had by and large been obliterated.
Preventing pagan misconceptions or Hellenistic Jewish mindsets was of no concern to Origen and Eusebius’ Origen Septuagint translation. The goal was to restore the Greek to match the Hebrew original.
And
in the context of Christian theology, with a tripartite godhead: the Trinity,
reverting to the Hebrew plural references to God in #5 and #7 would have made
good sense.
Attempts at reconstructing the ‘original’ Greek version of the Septuagint Canon has been a major challenge and scholars at Gottingen University, Germany, have worked on it for at least 75 years. Their conclusions are published as The Gottingen Septuagint (24 volumes) 2006.[xxxvii]
That
is, the Septuagint ‘changes’ in wording/meaning and even clauses may
well be – at times -- accurate translations, from a single source
Torah scroll that differed from the Masoretic text that we have.
Final Word
Now, we have come full circle in this two-part blog.
What started as a simple exploration of two Septuagint ‘passages’ in the Talmud Bavli, Megillah 9a-9b, has led to a lengthy and far ranging, meandering quest for ‘the truth’.
The Talmud passages were not of rabbinic creation and in good faith the Talmud passed on the narrative story and list of 14 ‘changes’.
The origin story had been filled with fictitious embellishments and ‘ballooned’ for centuries -- beginning with Aristreas’ letter. The rabbis of the Babylonian Talmud trusted the origin account as handed down from a Baraita some 300 years before.
But it was wrong. The perpetuation of a fabulous miracle idea.
The truth was very simple and mundane: one Hebrew Torah scroll and one translator – with a few translator assistants added if speed were needed.
The
one and only correct part of the origin tale was the twist noted
in the Baraita. Namely, the Greek
translation differed from the Hebrew original on purpose.
Changes were made so Greek kings, librarians, philosophers and Hellenized ‘educated’ Jews would not misinterpret the Holy Torah and develop heretical views.
The rabbis of the Talmud, therefore, eagerly ‘reprinted’ the fragment they had in full detail: 14 ‘changes’ with rationales that supported Jewish monotheism and respect for our ancestors.
The List the rabbis of the Talmud had, was a fragment of a major comparison project by some unknown bilingual expert completed by 145 BCE at the latest, and which somehow had been passed on for centuries in Hebrew.
Long
before the Talmud Bavli’s compilation c. 500 CE, the vast majority of ‘changes’
had disappeared: soon after 331 CE at the latest and the mass production of the
so-called Origen Septuagint.
Restoring transaltion ‘accuracy’ had trumped any long-ago Jewish scribal efforts to prevent pagan misconception re: God, monotheism and our august ancestors.
The
list fragment, by and large, no longer applied by c.500 CE to any Septuagint
copy.
But
the rabbis of the Talmud did not know this.
In good faith and out of a lack of Greek and Septuagint
access, they gave their imprimatur, their endorsement, to ‘changes’ that no
longer were relevant- that no longer existed.
The original,
full comparison project: its database and its summary chapter, and any knowledge
of its great researcher and analyst, are now long lost.
All
unfortunate – but true.
[vii] See Wikipedia entries above.
[xiii]
Talmud is from https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.9a.1?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en
. Hebrew texts with English
are from https://www.mechon-mamre.org/
and Greek texts are from
https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/physis/septuagint-genesis
Best direct Greek to English word by word translation is https://archive.org/details/InterlinearGreekEnglishSeptuagintOldTestamentPrint/page/n3/mode/2up?view=theater
[xxvi]
Ibid.
[xxvii]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy_VIII_Physcon and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy_XIV_Philopator
[xxxiii]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint
and see earlier blog, “The Tetragrammaton; the hidden name of God”
No comments:
Post a Comment