DOCSLIB.ORG

Let's Study Onkelos

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Let's Study Onkelos LET’S STUDY ONKELOS A Guide for Rabbis, Teachers and Torah Students to Study and Teach the Parashat Hashavua through the Eyes of its Most Important Translator By Stanley M. Wagner and Israel Drazin Based on the five volume, Onkelos on the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy), Understanding the Bible Text, by Israel Drazin and Stanley M. Wagner, published by Gefen Publishing House, Jerusalem/New York, 2006–2010. STUDY GUIDE MATTOT (CHAPTER 30:2–32:42) SUMMARY OF THE TORAH PORTION The laws concerning vows are presented, which allow an annulment of the vow in the case of a vow made by a wife or daughter; war is waged against the Midianites, they are defeated and many are annihilated; the Israelite warriors who killed someone in battle, or who came in contact with a corpse, must be purified, along with his garments and vessels; the spoils of war are divided and distributed, and instructions are provided for making these vessels acceptable for use; representatives of the tribes of Reuben and Gad approach Moses with a request that their tribes be allowed to settle on the eastern side of the Jordan River which has already been conquered; Moses remonstrates against them and warns that God will punish them and the nation if they choose to remain behind and not participate in the conquest of Canaan; Moses decides to allow them to settle their families on the east side of the Jordan River on condition that they will cross over with the rest of the nation and fight with their brethren to conquer the land, and they agree to do so. HOW SERIOUS IS THE MANDATE TO STUDY THE PARASHAH WEEKLY WITH THE ONKELOS TRANSLATION? We have been advocating a return to the study of Onkelos in order to truly understand the biblical text, thus also reinforcing the rabbinic mandate to do so. Rabbinic mandates 1 actually come on different levels of seriousness. All are important, but some are more important that others, if we assess them and their impact on Jewish life. There is an extraordinary discussion concerning Onkelos on what appears to be a very simple and uninspiring verse (32:2, pages 286 and 287)1 that contains nothing but names of places. It reads as follows: “Ataroth, Dibon, Jazer, Nimrah, Heshbon, Elealeh, Sebam, Nebo, and Beon,” Our appendix (pages 418–419) presents the fascinating dispute focused on this verse: The rabbis mandated that Jews should read the Torah portion three times weekly, twice in the original Hebrew and once in the translation of Onkelos. Verse 3 of our chapter contains only names. Does the rabbinical mandate apply to verse 3? The Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 8a, b, states that one should do the weekly reading also for verse 3, and such a reading prolongs life. While this may be a hyperbolic statement, it is clear that the rabbis wanted to emphasize that reading Onkelos is important. Rashi on Berakhot 8a, b explains that the Talmud is insisting that although verse 3 has no Aramaic translation, no exceptions should be made, and one should still read Onkelos. The Sperber and Berliner versions of our Targum, like the text held by Rashi, are not translated, but there are Onkelos versions that do translate the names. (The Onkelos in our edition contains the Aramaic translation of the names.) Rashi refers to Megillah 3a, where the rabbis discuss who wrote Onkelos, and assures us that Onkelos is the authorized text that the rabbis want Jews to read. This Targum was composed before the time of its alleged author, whom Rashi identifies as “Onkelos” (see our introduction to Genesis for more on the identity of the Onkelos targumist); God gave it to the Israelites at Sinai; however, as the Talmud states, it was “forgotten and then restored” by the Onkelos targumist. Tosaphot seem to differ slightly with Rashi. Tosaphot agree with Rashi that when the Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 49a, states that Jews should read the Targum weekly, they meant “our (authorized) translation” (“targum didan”) Onkelos. However, Tosaphot contend that since Onkelos has no translation, one should read Pseudo- Jonathan to verse 3. Tosaphot also state that the rabbis required the Targum reading because the Aramaic translation helps us understand the text. It is as Rav Yosef said in the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 3a, “Were it not for the Targum of this verse, we would not have known what it meant.” Tosaphot to Bava Kamma 3b explains that Rav Yosef was an expert in the Targum, a complex subject requiring years of expertise. Thus, according to Tosaphot, since the purpose of reading the Targum is to understand the text, Pseudo-Jonathan should be read. There is a reasonable support for Rashi’s position that Jews should read Onkelos to verse 3 even though it lacks a translation. The rabbis taught midrashic biblical interpretations in the Midrashim and the Talmuds. However, they recognized in their 1 All page numbers refer to the Drazin-Wagner Onkelos on the Torah volumes. 2 stated principle “ein mikra yotzei mi’dei peshuto,” that, in essence, people should also know the plain, non-aggadic biblical intent. Therefore, they advised—some say mandated—Jews to read Targum Onkelos because Onkelos contains the text’s plain meaning. Recognizing basic psychology, they knew that if they allowed exceptions, the minor exceptions would soon grow and ultimately the Targum would be ignored. Once this is understood, one can see the difficulty with Tosaphot’s position. The purpose of reading the Targum to understand the Torah’s plain meaning is defeated when one reads the midrashic Pseudo-Jonathan. This purpose is also nullified by those who maintain that since they cannot understand the Aramaic of Onkelos they can fulfill the rabbinic requirement to read Onkelos by reading Rashi; unlike Onkelos, Rashi generally contains midrashic material and not just the plain meaning of the Torah. It would be edifying, once again, to quote the Shulchan Arukh (Orach Chayim, Hilkhot Shabbat 285:1 and 2, based on Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Tephillah 13:25) verbatim, so that there will be no question in anyone’s mind concerning the authority of the law: Even though a person listens to the entire Torah reading every Shabbat with the congregation, he is (still) required to read individually every week the Torah portion twice from the Scriptural text, and once with the Targum (Onkelos), even Ataroth veDibon (verse 3). If one has reviewed the parashah with Rashi’s commentary, it is as though he reviewed it with the Targum, (however) God fearing persons will read the Targum and Rashi’s commentary. Interestingly, it is also permitted to fulfill the mandate of reviewing the Torah portion twice and once with the Targum during the congregational reading of the Torah (Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim, Hilkhot Keriat Sefer Torah 146:2 and Hilkhot Shabbat 285:5). Now, admittedly, this law fell into disuse, and as we indicated in our Preface, “the importance of accurate biblical translation gave way to an overwhelming preoccupation with interpretation; textual analysis was replaced by contextual exegesis; and lovers of the Bible focused almost exclusively on the brilliant commentaries that were composed to ‘flesh out’ biblical narratives and laws.” But it is also interesting to note that “the talmudic dictum was written when there were many important exegetical collections, like Genesis Rabbah, Mekhilta, Sifra and Sifrei. Yet, the oft-quoted recommendation urged only the reading of Onkelos when reviewing the Torah portion. Furthermore, by the time the Shulchan Arukh was written, and the law promulgated, most of the classical medieval biblical commentaries were already in circulation.” Nevertheless, Targum Onkelos was considered indispensable in order to understand the biblical text. 3 ADDITIONAL DISCUSSIONS ON ONKELOS We revert to the question: “How serious is the mandate to study the parashah weekly with the Onkelos translation?” In the first place, one can find justification for not fulfilling this law on the basis of the dictum, keivan d’dashu bei rabim, since most Jews, even in the Torah world, ignore this imperative, it no longer qualifies as a law that must be obeyed. Second, most people are not sufficiently acquainted with Aramaic to be able to understand or appreciate Targum Onkelos. Of course, now that Onkelos on the Torah is available with its English translation of the Aramaic and an English commentary that excuse appears rather lame. Third, these days there just isn’t enough time to do all of the Torah studying that we feel we should study. We have to set priorities; and compared to the importance of other requisite learning, reviewing Targum Onkelos weekly seems to be a very low priority. That seems reasonable. Actually, unfortunately, in the Torah world today, even Tanakh, the Bible itself, is given a low priority for students, who are expected to devote themselves entirely to rabbinic literature—the Talmud and commentaries, responsa and Shulchan Arukh and commentaries. How do you now feel about the importance of Onkelos in your own set of Torah learning priorities? GENERAL DISCUSSION We raise questions in our “Beyond the Text” (page 285) on chapter 31 that merit our attention and are worthy of discussing. We bring them to your attention: Chapter 31 contains God’s command to “Avenge the Israelite grievance against the Midianites” (verse 2; see commentary). It is true that the Midianite hostile actions in attempting to lure the Israelites away from God and the Torah required a response. The question is whether “vengeance” is an appropriate motivation for hostility. Can you think of circumstances today when “revenge” would be justified? God is known as the “El nekamot,” “the God of vengeance” (Psalms 18:48).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Be Read, but Not Translated (M
    CHAPTER FIFTEEN לא מתרגם בציבורא—NOT TO BE TRANSLATED IN PUBLIC Introduction The subject of “forbidden targumim” has been discussed periodically in papers devoted to the specific topic, as well as in more general studies of the relationship between the targumim and other rabbinic literature.1 The point of departure of these studies has understandably been the lists contained in the Tannaitic sources and the discussion of those lists in the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds. Much effort has been expended in trying to establish a “correct version” of the lists, in identifying the passages in question, and in search of a rationale for each of the particular forbidden items. As readily observed, there is almost complete unanimity among the rabbinic lists regarding the passages in the Pentateuch that “may The Mishnah .נקראין ואינן מתרגמין ”,be read, but not translated (m. Megillah 4:10), Tosefta (t. Megillah 4:35 ff ), and the later Talmudic sources2 all agree that the “Story of Reuben” (Gen 35:22) and the “sec- ond account of the [golden] calf” (Exod 32:21–35) fall into this cat- egory. The only other Pentateuchal passage assigned to this group is “the priestly blessing” (Num 6:24–26), according to the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds (b. Megillah 25b; y. Megillah 75c). But this seems to be based upon a compounded error. J. Heinemann has argued rather convincingly that the statement regarding the “priestly blessing” was not originally related to the weekly Torah reading or its rendition 1 E.g., A. Geiger, Urschrift und Übersetzungen der Bibel (Breslau, 1857), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PENTATEUCHAL TARGUMS: a REDACTION HISTORY and GENESIS 1: 26-27 in the EXEGETICAL CONTEXT of FORMATIVE JUDAISM by GUDRUN EL
    THE PENTATEUCHAL TARGUMS: A REDACTION HISTORY AND GENESIS 1: 26-27 IN THE EXEGETICAL CONTEXT OF FORMATIVE JUDAISM by GUDRUN ELISABETH LIER THESIS Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR LITTERARUM ET PHILOSOPHIAE in SEMITIC LANGUAGES AND CULTURES in the FACULTY OF HUMANITIES at the UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG PROMOTER: PROF. J.F. JANSE VAN RENSBURG APRIL 2008 ABSTRACT THE PENTATEUCHAL TARGUMS: A REDACTION HISTORY AND GENESIS 1: 26-27 IN THE EXEGETICAL CONTEXT OF FORMATIVE JUDAISM This thesis combines Targum studies with Judaic studies. First, secondary sources were examined and independent research was done to ascertain the historical process that took place in the compilation of extant Pentateuchal Targums (Fragment Targum [Recension P, MS Paris 110], Neofiti 1, Onqelos and Pseudo-Jonathan). Second, a framework for evaluating Jewish exegetical practices within the age of formative Judaism was established with the scrutiny of midrashic texts on Genesis 1: 26-27. Third, individual targumic renderings of Genesis 1: 26-27 were compared with the Hebrew Masoretic text and each other and then juxtaposed with midrashic literature dating from the age of formative Judaism. Last, the outcome of the second and third step was correlated with findings regarding the historical process that took place in the compilation of the Targums, as established in step one. The findings of the summative stage were also juxtaposed with the linguistic characterizations of the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Project (CAL) of Michael Sokoloff and his colleagues. The thesis can report the following findings: (1) Within the age of formative Judaism pharisaic sages and priest sages assimilated into a new group of Jewish leadership known as ‘rabbis’.
    [Show full text]
  • Translation, Midrash, and Commentary Through the Eyes of Onkelos
    TRANSLATION, MIDRASH, AND COMMENTARY THROUGH THE EYES OF ONKELOS STANLEY M. WAGNER Maimonides, in his Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Tefillah (12:10), gives the ori- gin of the Aramaic translation of the Torah. The process began orally with Ezra in the fifth century BCE, and culminated years later with written transla- tions of the Torah into Aramaic. He informs us that Ezra introduced the pub- lic reading of the Torah with a meturgeman , a person who translated Torah passages into Aramaic. Ezra also democratized Jewish education by estab- lishing a new class of interpreters of Torah called soferim who began to re- place the priests as teachers of the people. Ezra was thus responsible for insti- tuting measures that set the stage for a widespread understanding of Torah through translation and interpretation. He was also responsible for setting the stage for the birth of "Rabbinic Judaism" that came into fruition after the de- struction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, and a new understanding of biblical 1 texts that often departed from their literal meaning. While neither Ezra nor his translators produced a written targum accessible to the masses, the process of translating the Bible into Aramaic resulted, be- fore long, in the availability of multiple written targumim, each with its own style and subjectivity. Actually, the oldest Aramaic targum discovered, but only in fragments, was found in Qumran, which means that it must be dated 2 prior to the destruction of the Qumran community in 68 CE. We can safely say that there was a written targum in use by the first or second century BCE.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nuances of TRGM(” to Translate ”) in the Rabbinic Writings
    JISMOR 6 Etsuko Katsumata The Nuances of TRGM (“to translate”) in the Rabbinic Writings1) Etsuko Katsumata Abstract This paper analyzes examples of the terms rooted in the word “TRGM” in rabbinic writing from the periods of Tannaim and Amoraim and clarifies the changing nuances of TRGM. The analysis of about 350 examples shows changes in the usage of the terms from Tannaitic materials to Amoraic materials, and more changes from Palestinian materials to Babylonian materials among the Amoraic materials. Most of the examples from the Tannaitic period are related to the public reading of the Hebrew Bible at synagogues. As for the Amoraic period, there are a significant number of examples of formulas quoted from Aramaic translations of the Bible, and derivatives of TRGM are found to be used for more common interpretation activities. In the Babylonian materials, the word “TRGM” was used to describe a rabbi’s interpretation activity. On the contrary, the Palestinian materials imply a certain kind of scorn for TRGM, which was considered separate from a rabbi’s orthodox interpretation activity, expressed by other verbs such as PTḤ (“to open, start”) and PTR (“to interpret”). This analysis of TRGM usages provides evidence of a skeptical attitude by the rabbis in Palestine toward TRGM. Keywords: Aramaic language, targum (the Aramaic translation of the Bible), rabbinic writings, interpretation of the Bible, formality 1. Introduction 1) Position of the targumim in Jewish studies The word “targum” refers to “translation” in a broad sense and an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible in a more limited sense. It is said that public readings of the Torah were given on Sabbaths in Aramaic, which was current and understandable to those with difficulty in understanding Hebrew after their return from captivity.2) A targum (hereinafter meaning “an Aramaic translation of the Bible) goes beyond literal translation and is regarded as literature that contains various original commentaries and amplifications; however, its identity has not yet received much attention.
    [Show full text]
  • Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer and Eastern Christian Exegesis∗
    Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer and Eastern Christian Exegesis ∗ Helen SPURLING – Emmanouela GRYPEOU University of Cambridge Resumen: This paper will discuss the use of traditions from the Christian Orient for the understanding of the development of the motifs in Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer. The process of the development of the material in PRE is much discussed, with particular reference to other Jewish literature. However, a number of the motifs that represent a new development in PRE are also common ideas in sources from the Christian Orient. This paper will focus on four examples from PRE which reflect exegesis also found in traditions of the Christian Orient, and mark an initial endeavour to identify the material in PRE that may have been influenced by Christian thought. Abstract: Este artículo estudia la utilización de las tradiciones procedentes del Oriente Cristiano para poder comprender el desarrollo de los motivos contenidos en el Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer. El proceso del desarrollo del material contenido en el PRE es analizado en detalle, con especial referencia al resto de la literatura judáica. Sin embargo, un número de motivos que representan un nuevo desarrollo en el PRE son, así mismo, ideas comunes en fuentes del Oriente Cristiano. Este artículo se ocupa de cuatro ejemplos del PRE, que reflejan una exégesis que se encuentra también en tradiciones del Oriente Cristiano y marcan una tentativa inicial para identificar aquel material del PRE que puede haber sido influenciado por el pensamiento cristiano. Palabras clave: Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer. Oriente cristiano. Exégesis. Génesis. Keywords: Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer. Christian Orient. Exegesis. Genesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vocabulary of Targum Onkelos, the Oldest Extant Jewish Aramaic Translation of the Pentateuch, Has Been an Object of Study for Centuries
    INTRODUCTION The vocabulary of Targum Onkelos, the oldest extant Jewish Aramaic translation of the Pentateuch, has been an object of study for centuries. The Babylonian Talmud contains observations on particular words and passages, and in the medieval period luminaries such as Maimonides and Rashi used the targum extensively and made comments on its wording. During the Renaissance, Elias Levita’s Meturgeman (1541) inaugurated a more systematic approach to Targumic Aramaic lexicography and included a large part of Onkelos’s vocabulary, with exemplification. He was followed by others, including Johannes Buxtorf’s Lexicon chaldaicum, talmudicum et rabbinicum (1639-40), which, in various editions, served scholars for several generations.1 In the modern period, the vocabulary of Onkelos has been treated by J. Levy,2 Marcus Jastrow,3 and Gustav Dalman.4 Levy’s work was devoted solely to the targumim, and included, besides Onkelos, the vocabulary of Targum Jonathan to the Prophets, the Palestinian Targums known to him (i.e., Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and the Fragment-Targum), and the Targums to the Writings. Jastrow and Dalman, in the tradition of Buxtorf, attempted to treat all the vocabulary found in rabbinic literature, both Hebrew and Aramaic. Dalman evinced an awareness of the importance of using reliable manuscripts, although he did not always do this consistently; and, unlike his predecessors, Dalman cited his sources. For Onkelos, he used Ms. Socin 84, in the possession of the Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft.5 Still, although targum studies and Aramaic lexicography have made great strides since the time of Dalman and Jastrow, no dictionary has ever 1 The most recent edition is Joannis Buxtorfii Lexicon chaldaicum, talmudicum et rabbinicum, ed.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Please provide footnote text Bibliography Primary Texts Aberbach, Moses and Bernard Grossfeld. Targum Onkelos to Genesis: A Critical Analysis Together with an English Translation of the Text (Based on A. Sperber’s Edition). New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1982. Beattie, Derek Robert George and J. Stanley McIvor. The Targum of Ruth and the Targum of Chronicles. The Aramaic Bible 19. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1994. Berman, Samuel A. Midrash Tanhuma-Yelammedenu. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1996. Braude, William G. Pesikta Rabbati. 2 vols. Yale Judaica Series vol. 18. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968. Braude, William G. and Israel J. Kapstein. Pesikta de-Rab Kahana. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 2002. Buber, S. Midrash Tanhuma. 2 vols. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1989. Clarke, Ernest G. Targum Pseudo-Jonathan of the Pentateuch: Text and Concordance. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav, 1984. Diez Macho, Alejandro. Neophyti 1: Targum Palestinense MS de la Biblioteca Vaticana. Tomo II: Exodo. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, 1970. Diez Macho, Alejandro. Neophyti 1: Targums Palestinense MS de la Biblioteca Vaticana. Tomo IV: Numeros. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, 1974. Drazin, Israel. Targum Onkelos to Exodus: An English Translation of the Text with Analysis and Commentary (Based on the A. Sperber and A. Berliner Edition). Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1990. Drazin, Israel. Targum Onkelos to Numbers: An English Translation of the Text with Analysis and Commentary (Based on the A. Sperber and A. Berliner Edition). Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1998. Dunsky, Samson. Midrash Rabbah: Shir ha-Shirim. Jerusalem: Devir, 1980.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity. the Day of Atonement
    Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Herausgeber / Editor Jörg Frey Mitherausgeber / Associate Editors Friedrich Avemarie • Judith Gundry-Volf Martin Hengel • Otfried Hofius • Hans-Josef Klauck 163 ARTI BUS Daniel Stokl Ben Ezra The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity The Day of Atonement from Second Temple Judaism to the Fifth Century Mohr Siebeck DANIEL STÖKL BEN EZRA, born 1970; studied Theology in Bochum and Bern; Comparati- ve Religion and Jewish Studies in Jerusalem; 2002 Ph.D.; since fall 2003 Mandel Fellow at Scholion - Interdisciplinary Research Center in Jewish Studies, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. ISBN 3-16-148092-0 ISSN 0512-1604 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de. © 2003 by J. C. B. Möhr (Paul Siebeck), P. O. Box 2040, D-72010 Tübingen. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Guide Druck in Ttibingen on non-aging paper and bound by Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. to my dear parents and parents in law Andreas Stökl and Herzeleide Stökl, born. v. Schlabrendorff Joe Ben Ezra and Corinne Ben Ezra, born Shabtai Preface This study presents my doctoral dissertation "The Impact of Yom Kippur on Early Christianity," accepted by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in May 2002.1 have reworked many arguments, included further observations and updated the bibliography.
    [Show full text]
  • Targums, the New Testament, and Biblical Theology of the Messiah Michael B
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville Biblical and Theological Studies Faculty School of Biblical and Theological Studies Publications 2008 Targums, the New Testament, and Biblical Theology of the Messiah Michael B. Shepherd Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/ biblical_and_ministry_studies_publications Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Shepherd, Michael B., "Targums, the New Testament, and Biblical Theology of the Messiah" (2008). Biblical and Theological Studies Faculty Publications. 294. http://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/biblical_and_ministry_studies_publications/294 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biblical and Theological Studies Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JETS 51/1 (March 2008) 45–58 TARGUMS, THE NEW TESTAMENT, AND BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF THE MESSIAH michael b. shepherd i. introduction Renewed interest in the relationship of the Targums to the NT was ignited by three events during the mid-twentieth century: Paul Kahle’s publication of fragments from the Cairo Geniza; the discovery of Targums at Qumran; and Alejandro Díez Macho’s discovery of Targum Neofiti.1 Parallel to these developments in biblical studies was the research on the supposed Aramaic substratum of the
    [Show full text]
  • Targum Onkelos and Torah Scroll from the Collections of Francesco Petrarch
    SCRIPTA JUDAICA CRACOVIENSIA Vol. 14 (2016) pp. 57–68 doi: 10.4467/20843925SJ.16.004.5663 T O T S C F P: P L B Przemysław Dec (Jagiellonian University in Kraków) Key words: targum, Aramaic, Targum Onkelos, Hebrew Bible, Francesco Petrarch Abstract: This article contains a brief description of the Codex of Petrarch, which is located in the Czartoryski Library in Kraków. Preliminary analysis proves that the Codex comes from Italy or France. The Czartoryski family bought it in the nineteenth century. The Petrarch Codex contains two incomplete biblical books: Genesis 23:8 – Exodus 14:28, i.e. Hebrew text and Aramaic trans- lation. The analysis is focused on three main aspects: historical, paleographical and linguistics. The detailed analysis proved that the Aramaic text was in some aspects very similar to Targum Onkelos, and in others it was very similar to Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. Most importantly, the text contains an unknown version of Targum Onkelos. Therefore the article also shows morphologi- cal and grammatical differences between the official edition of the Targum Onkelos and the text. The discovery of the manuscript In autumn 2007, along with several scholars from the Jagiellonian University, I founded a research team to work on Hebrew manuscripts. One of the PhD students and I headed to the Department of Archives and Manuscripts collection of the Czartoryski Museum. We wanted to see and photograph scrolls in Hebrew that were to be researched by Prof. Judith Szlanger-Olszowy from Paris. We knew about the existence of a few He- brew manuscripts, but we did not know their contents.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Important Jewish Terms Important People and Items
    A Chrestomathy (Helpful List) of Important Jewish Terms Important People and Items A guide to terms found in The Commentators’ Bible series. This is to supplement the introductory material and glossary already in The Commentators’ Bible series. Key: • Names are usually entered as they are first found in The Commentators’ Bible. Subsequent names are other ways to refer to the same person. • b. = ben/bar • r. = Rabbi Aaron b. Asher b. Moses ........................ (B. Asher or Abu Said) (10th century AD, d. c.960) was a scholar of the biblical text from Tiberias, on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. He is descended from a long line of Masoretes, dating back to the 8th century and Asher the Elder. He wrote a manuscript of the Hebrew Bible with vowel points and accents, which is the basis for the present Masoretic Text (MT). Maimonides endorsed B. Asher’s MT as superior to B. Naphtali’s text. Aaron b. Joseph Ha-Kohen Sargado ....... (R. Aaron ibn Sargado) (10th century AD) was the ga’on of the academy at Pumbedita in Babylon from 942-960. Abba Jose b. Hanan ................................ (1st century AD) was a rabbi and tanna whose views were recorded in the Mishnah. R. Abbahu ............................................... (290-320 AD) was an amora and a renowned Jewish scholar from Palestine. His teachings are recorded in the Talmud. Abarbanel ............................................... (R. Isaac b. Judah Abrabanel (Abravanel or Abarbanel) or R. Don Isaac Abravanel) (1437-1508) was a Portuguese Jewish statesman, philosopher, Bible commentator, and financier. In his Bible commentaries, he would start each new chapter with a list of questions or difficulties that he set out to explain over the course of the chapter.
    [Show full text]
  • Flesher CV 19-03-01
    CURRICULUM VITAE NAME Paul V. M. Flesher March 1, 2019 ADDRESS PHONE Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies Work (307) 766-2616 1000 E. University Avenue Department 3392 Cell (307) 760-6545 University of Wyoming [email protected] Laramie, WY 82071-3392 USA EDUCATION 1988 Ph.D., History of Judaism, Brown University, Providence, R.I. Title: “Oxen, Women, or Citizens? Slaves in the System of the Mishnah” 1985 - 1986 Visiting Research Student, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel 1982 M.Phil., Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period, Oxford University, Oxford, England 1979 B.A., Religious Studies, University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y. ACADEMIC POSITIONS 2012 – Professor of Religious Studies, Religious Studies Program, University of Wyoming 1993 – 2012 Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Religious Studies Program, University of Wyoming 1988 – 1993 Assistant Professor of Religions, Department of Religions, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 1988 Visiting Instructor of Religious Studies, Department of Religious Studies, Wittenberg University, Springfield, OH ADMINISTRATIVE and OTHER POSITIONS 2019 (March-April) Acting Chief Engagement Officer and Acting Director, Office of Engagement and Outreach, University of Wyoming 2017 – Assistant Chair, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, University of Wyoming 2010, Spring Acting Director, African American and Diaspora Studies Program, U. Wyoming 2008 – Director, Saturday University (a faculty outreach program to the state.) 1998 – 2007 Council Faculty member, Western
    [Show full text]