palestinian targum and new testament

Palestinian Targum and New TestamentAuthor(s): José Ramón DíazSource: Novum Testamentum, Vol. 6, Fasc. 1 (Jan., 1963), pp. 75-80Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560310 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 08:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Novum Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.208 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 08:57:46 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560310?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


PALESTINIAN TARGUM AND NEW TESTAMENT

BY

DR JOSE RAMON DIAZ 12 Hornsey Lane, London N-6, England

The common background which some passages of the New Testament and of the Palestinian Targum betray, has already been several times asserted and I just want to give a few more parallelled instances.

Under the name Palestinian Targum, I list the fragmentary Targum 1), the Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan ben 'Uzziel 2), the

fragments published by KAHLE 3) and DIEZ MACHO 4) and the Codex

Neofiti 5). This material is not perfectly homogeneous, yet its differences

have not been sufficiently analysed to permit a worth-while state- ment on the chronological order of the various sources. Certain it is that the Targum contains ancient traditions, notwithstanding a number of geographical or historical names which point to more

1) The T. Jerushalmi was first printed for the rabbinical Bible in Venice, 1.517/1.518. MOSES GINSBURGER published: Das Fragmenten thargum (Targum Jeruschalmi zum Pentateuch). Berlin, 1899. He took as the funda- mental text of his edition Cod. Par. IIO, and gave the varying readings of others mss, and, occasionally, of the printed text and other minor sources.

do( not think that the various readings have been sufficiently collated. 2) First printed in Venice 1591, by ASHER FORINS who copied it out of

a ms. belonging to the Foa Family. MosEs GINSBURGER edited: Pseudo Jonathan ben Uzziel (Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel zum Pentateuch).

Nach der Londoner Handschrift (Brit. Mus. add. 27.03I). Berlin 1903. But this edition remains far from being a critical one. Words are frequently

incompletely rendered (yod and wau especially are missing) or they are changed into others. Marginal notes have not always been properly read; sometimes even a sentence is removed from the text and given among the footnotes or simply left out. On the contrary, additions from the medieval authors are inserted in the text. There are a few vocalized words in the ms., but we are not told of them.

3) Masoreten des Westens. Stuttgart 1930, II pp. I-65. 4) Sefarad XV (I955) pp. 3I-39. As the present study is confined to Genesis

I shall not refer to other fragments of the palestinian Targum, belonging to other books.

5) A. DIEZ MACHO. The recently discovered Palestinian Targum: its antiquity and relationship to the other Targums in Congress Volume Oxford 1959 (Supple- ments to Vetus Testamentum, VII 1960), pp. 222-245.



JOSE RAMON DIAZ

recent times but which really are nothing but late interpolations. The mixed character of the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan ben 'Uzziel

-mainly its philological orientalisation-has been explained in terms of an accommodation of the Palestinian Targum to the

Targum of Onkelos. This would imply the pre-existence of a T.

Onkelos, already achieved. But one would rather imagine that the Palestinian Targum, i.e., the palestinian paraphrastic translations and comments of the Pentateuch, while being preached and, occa-

sionally written down, gradually acquired these features which are now called orientalisms. They do not convey therefore an oriental-

babylonian-editing but they are just the result of an accomodation of the palestinian paraphrasis to the biblical Aramaic which was held to be more or less the standard classic language 1). Writing and solemn preaching convey a certain amount of emphasis and of

avoiding plain spoken forms. However, the choice of impressive and adequate expressions being difficult and to a certain extent

allowing subjectivisms, one has to expect a lack of regularity in this kind of paraphrastic comment progressively elaborated2). The T. Onkelos, if this assumption proves correct, ought to be considered as the last stage of the "litteralisation" of former traditions. It could not have reached its regularity, one must acknowledge, with- out the influence of learned people who were, on the other hand, aware of the babylonian literary activity. Minor retouches and

improvements of T. Onkelos, under the hands of the babylonian doctors, are to be admitted as well.

So, we can understand better perhaps why the Aramaic of T.

Onkelos, on one hand, keeps a Palestinian pattern in spite of its orientalisms and why the Palestinian Targum, on the other hand, preserves a number of orientalisms ("lehom: for them", for instan-

ce), which are not even to be found in the T. Onkelos.

Jn. iv 15 "(. .. a well of water springing up into everlasting life". Palestinian Targum, Gn. xxviii 10 3): "Five signs were performed

1) We do not know which writings shared perhaps with the Bible the privilege of exhibiting classic standard Aramaic. It might be that words and expressions now held as being literally ones were instead real spoken Aramaic, or words considered as literary ones in certain places could be considered elsewhere, or in the same place at other times, colloquial.

2) Among the Palestiniam Targum sources the fragments published by KAHLE and DIEZ MACHO (Cf. above), seem to be the more homogeneous. And

perhaps their most constant feature is the retention of the ending "an enan" in the i pers. com. pl., either as an independent pronoun or as a sufix.

3) J. W. ETHERIDGE: The Targum of Onkelos ans Pseudo Jonathan ben

76




for our father Jacob at the time he went forth from Beersheba to go unto Haran ... the fifth sign: after our father Jacob had lifted the stone from the mouth of the well, the well rose (slqt) to its surface and

overflowed (tft) and was overflowing twenty years: all the days that our father dwelt in Haran." 1)

Now, in the Gospel, the Samaritan woman says to Jesus: "Sir, you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep; where do you get that living water? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well ... ".

Jesus answers: "... the water I shall give him will be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life". Water for ever, not for twenty years as in the Jacob's story. So Jesus is really greater than Jacob.

May we not assume that through all this passage of the Gospel runs that ancient tradition preserved in the Palestinian Targum? Only, the Haran well has been transferred into Palestine.

i Pet i 12: ". . . good news to you through the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look."

Palestinian Targum.-Gn. xxviii II: Jacob dreamed and, behold a ladder was fixed in the earth, and the summit of it reached to the height of heaven. And behold, the angels who had accompanied him from the house of his father ascended to make known to the angels on high saying: "Come, see Jacob the pious, whose likeness 2) is in the throne of glory 3) and whom you had been desirous to see. And behold the holy angels from before the Lord ascended and descended and looked at him". (Etheridge op. cit. p. 253) 4).

Ephes. iv, 22-25: "Put off your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts,

cUzziel on the Pentateuch; with the fragments of the Jerusalem Targum London I862, pp. 252-3. I follow this translation although not very strictly. If I happen to change a word I do not call attention to it, unless ETHERIDGE'S translation is, in my opinion, wrong.

1) So Neofiti and Cod. Par. IIo, printed by GINSBURGER. The text printed in the rabbinical Bible omits the sentence: "the well rose to its surface".

2) Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel: "whose likeness is fixed in the throne of glory". (Cf. i Cor. xv 48-49; Heb. i 3).

3) Instead of "yer"', "glory", GINSBURGER in his edition writes: "wqr"' ,,and he called," which is incorrect. Ms. Add. 27.03i, states correctly "glory". Here, also, GINSBURGER writes "lmhmy"; but the ms. add. 27.031 has: "lmyhmy". These orthographical inaccuracies are not infrequent in the GINSBURGER edition.

4) So Neofiti and Y6rushalmi.-Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel differs slightly from them.

77



JOSE RAMON DIAZ

and be renewed in the spirit of your mind and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness."

(Cf. Colos. iii 9). Palestinian Targum.-The first man was created with a frag-

rant robe 1) but he was divested of it after sinning: ". . . and the

eyes of both were enlightened and they knew that they were naked because they had been divested of the fragrant robe in which they had been created."

ETHERIDGE, op. cit. p. I68 2). Afterwards, God clothes Adam and Eve (Gn. iii 3-21): "And the Lord God made to Adam and to his wife vestures of honour from the skin of the serpent which he had cast from it 3) upon the skin of their flesh in exchange for their

fragrancy 4), from which they had been cast away 5), and he clothed them". ETHERIDGE op. cit. p. I68.

Further allusions to this vestment of the first Man, appear occa-

sionally in the Targum. Jacob had to put on that vestment when he wanted to obtain his father's blessing. Then Jacob gave it to Joseph (Gn. xlviii 22): "I give you one portion above thy brethren, the robe

(lbwshyh d'dm qdm'h) of the first Adam. Abraham the father of

my father took it from the hands of Nimrod the wicked, and gave it to Ishak my father; and I took it from the hands of Esau my brother, not with my sword not with my bow, but through my righteousness and my good works". ETHERIDGE op. cit. p. 329.

In the New Testament, especially in the letters of Paul, the word "flesh" frequently conveys an idea of opposition to spirit, to grace, to life. Rom. viii 6: "To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace". (cf. Rom. vii 5).

In the Palestinian Targum, Joseph is blamed because he asks for the favor of Pharaoh's chief butler: "He left the grace (or the mercy

hsd) from above for the grace from beneath 6), and the grace

1) This passage is only found in Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel. The expression "fragrant robe" is "twfr'", which should perhaps be translate as "fragrance". ETHERIDGE translates: "purple robe".

2) This text apparently is in Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel alone. 3) The serpent is ordered to cast off its skin once in seven years, as a penal-

ty (Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel, iii 14). 4) Ms. Add. 27.03i has: "twfryhwn" their fragrance. ETHERIDGE trans-

lates: "that adornment = shwfrhwn", according to the text printed in the Bibles. I rather think this is a corruption, the "teth" being sometimes written similar to the shin.

5) "d'yshtlhw". So ms. add. 27.031. -GINSBURGER writes: "d'shtlhw". 6) ETHERIDGE, p. 300, translates: "He left the mercy above and the

78




which accompanied him from his father's house, and put his confi- dence in the chief butler: he trusted 1) in the flesh, the flesh which

passes away and tastes the cup of death" 2). Let us now recall an opposite passage from the history of the

deluge referring to the spirit. Gn. vi 3: "because I have given (or: have I not given?) my holy spirit unto them that they may work

good works", (Pseudo-Jonathan ben 'Uzziel). "I have given my spirit to the sons of man because they are flesh and their works are bad works. (Jerushalmi and Neofiti).

Jn. viii 39-45. In this passage Jesus tells the Jews that they are not the sons of Abraham nor the sons of God: they want to murder

him, because they are the sons of the devil who was a murderer from the beginning.

Now in the Palestinian Targum (Gn. v, 3 3), Cain, the proto- type of the unrighteous men, is not ranged among the sons of God not is his seed. "And Adam... begat Seth who had the likeness of his image and of his similitude: for before, had Eve born Cain, who was not like him ... and Cain was cast out: neither is his seed

genealogized in the book of genealogy of Adam. ETHERIDGE op. cit.

p. I74. (Cf. the genealogy of Luke, iii 28). Cain was believed to have been born from Eve and Samael 4), an angel called (Gn. iii 22): "the

angel of death" and who is to be identified with the evil. (Cf. the

'Aruk, under the name Samael).

mercy beneath. "But he did not notice the "beth" before "hsd". " The whole text according to Yerushalmi and Neofiti reads": "shbq hsd' dl' bhsd' dlrc". M. BLACK translates like Etherbridge.

1) He trusted: "w'trhs". So even Pseudo Jonathan ben 'U1zziel, ms. add.

27.03I fol. 45 b. in spite of GINSBURGER who attributes to him: "w'thrs"

(GINSBURGER op. cit. p. 75, note 8). 2) ETHERIDGE translates inaccurately: "he trusteth in the flesh, and the

flesh he tested of, even the cup of death", "bbsr 'byr bbsr tcm" (Neofiti margen: t'ym) ks' dmw't". R. LE DEAUT, who examines the expression: "to taste the cup of death" (in Deuteronomy xxxii I) says it to be a very rare one. Cf. Biblica (I962) p. 83.

3) Pseudo Jonathan ben 'Uzziel alone.

4) This is expressely stated in ms. add. 27.03I: "and Adam knew his wife, who had desired the angel (dhwh hmydt). The editio princeps has: "dhw'

hmyd' ml'k' ". GINSBURGER changes "ydC" to "hkym", and "hhy"' to

"dhy"'. He adds after "ml'k"' some words borrowed from the text printed in the Bibles and some others borrowed from Menahem Recanate, who in Venice, in 1523, wrote a commentary to the Pentateuch. This is another example of the uncritical level of the GINSBURGER edition.

When Eve bears Abel, it is expressely stated that his father is Adam: "and she added to bear from her husband his twin, Abel" (Pseudo Jonathan ben IUzziel, Gn. iv 2).

79



80 DIAZ, PALESTINIAN TARGUM AND NEW TESTAMENT

I wonder if this context of thought does not underly the quoted passage of John's Gospel as well as the parallel passage of Jn. iii 8- I2: ". . .the devil has sinned from the beginning... No one born of God commits sin; for God offspring abide in him ... Not be like Cain who was of the evil one and murdered his brother".



palestinian targum and new testament

Documents