Here is an interesting Torah Temimah on Vayera:
The pasuk is Bereishit 18:12:
"And Sarah laughed within herself, saying: 'After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?'"
Interestingly, the Targum Onkelos on this is
The word בִּמְעַהָא, in her innards, can be quite literal and anatomical. Maybe she is laughing about her innards, about the state of her womb. Compare to parashat Toledot, where it translates both the Hebrew bikirbah (as here), and means womb:
as well as a few pesukim later where it serves as a translation for bivitnah:
At any rate, Torah Temimah directs our attention to a gemara in Megillah 9a, where Ptolemy compelled 70 Jewish Sages to translate the Torah to Greek:
Rashi on Megillah 9a explains the reasoning for this change, regarding Sarah laughing, as follows:
After citing Rashi, Torah Temimah continues:
12 And Sarrha laughed in herself, saying, The thing has not as yet happened to me, even until now, and my lord is old.
The pasuk is Bereishit 18:12:
וַתִּצְחַ֥ק שָׂרָ֖ה בְּקִרְבָּ֣הּ לֵאמֹ֑ר אַֽחֲרֵ֤י בְלֹתִי֙ הָֽיְתָה־לִּ֣י עֶדְנָ֔ה וַֽאדֹנִ֖י זָקֵֽן׃
"And Sarah laughed within herself, saying: 'After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?'"
Interestingly, the Targum Onkelos on this is
וְחַיֵּיכַת שָׂרָה, בִּמְעַהָא לְמֵימַר: בָּתַר דְּסֵיבִית תְּהֵי לִי עוּלֵימוּ, וְרִבּוֹנִי סִיב.
The word בִּמְעַהָא, in her innards, can be quite literal and anatomical. Maybe she is laughing about her innards, about the state of her womb. Compare to parashat Toledot, where it translates both the Hebrew bikirbah (as here), and means womb:
| כה,כב וַיִּתְרֹצְצוּ הַבָּנִים, בְּקִרְבָּהּ, וַתֹּאמֶר אִם-כֵּן, לָמָּה זֶּה אָנֹכִי; וַתֵּלֶךְ, לִדְרֹשׁ אֶת-ה. | וְדָחֲקִין בְּנַיָּא, בִּמְעַהָא, וַאֲמַרַת אִם כֵּין, לְמָא דְּנָן אֲנָא; וַאֲזַלַת, לְמִתְבַּע אֻלְפָן מִן קֳדָם יְיָ. |
| כה,כד וַיִּמְלְאוּ יָמֶיהָ, לָלֶדֶת; וְהִנֵּה תוֹמִם, בְּבִטְנָהּ. | וּשְׁלִימוּ יוֹמַהָא, לְמֵילַד; וְהָא תְּיוֹמִין, בִּמְעַהָא. |
At any rate, Torah Temimah directs our attention to a gemara in Megillah 9a, where Ptolemy compelled 70 Jewish Sages to translate the Torah to Greek:
מעשה בתלמי המלך שכינס שבעים ושנים זקנים והכניסן בשבעים ושנים בתים ולא גילה להם על מה כינסן ונכנס אצל כל אחד ואחד ואמר להם כתבו לי תורת משה רבכם נתן הקב"ה בלב כל אחד ואחד עצה והסכימו כולן לדעת אחת וכתבו לו (בראשית א, כז) אלהים ברא בראשית (בראשית א, א) אעשה אדם בצלם ובדמות (בראשית א, כו) ויכל ביום הששי וישבות ביום השביעי (בראשית ה, ב) זכר ונקבה בראו ולא כתבו בראם (בראשית יא, ז) הבה ארדה ואבלה שם שפתם (בראשית יח, יב) ותצחק שרה בקרוביה (בראשית מט, ו) כי באפם הרגו שור וברצונם עקרו אבוס (שמות ד, כ) ויקח משה את אשתו ואת בניו וירכיבם על נושא בני אדם (שמות יב, מ) ומושב בני ישראל אשר ישבו במצרים ובשאר ארצות ארבע מאות שנה (שמות כד, ה) וישלח את זאטוטי בני ישראל (שמות כד, יא) ואל זאטוטי בני ישראל לא שלח ידו (במדבר טז, טו) לא חמוד אחד מהם נשאתי (דברים ד, יט) אשר חלק ה' אלהיך אתם להאיר לכל העמים (דברים יז, ג) וילך ויעבוד אלהים אחרים אשר לא צויתי לעובדם וכתבו לו את צעירת הרגלים ולא כתבו לו (ויקרא יא, ו) את הארנבת מפני שאשתו של תלמי ארנבת שמה שלא יאמר שחקו בי היהודים והטילו שם אשתי בתורה:Within this list is ותצחק שרה בקרוביה, that she laughed with her relatives. This looks like a slight misspelling of בקרבה, just as לא חמוד אחד מהם נשאתי (a desirous thing, rather than donkey) looks like a slight misspelling of לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי, yet is, according to this midrash, a deliberate change, even as the target translation was Greek, where such close spellings seem irrelevant. I would point out that ואמר להם כתבו לי תורת משה רבכם does not imply any translation. Perhaps Ptolemy was demanding a mere transcription of the Hebrew text, rather than a translation?
Rashi on Megillah 9a explains the reasoning for this change, regarding Sarah laughing, as follows:
בקרוביה - שלא יאמר על אברהם לא הקפיד דכתיב ויצחק ועל שרה הקפיד לפיכך כתבו בקרוביה לומר אברהם בלבו והיא אמרה בקרוביה:"That he should not say that about Avraham He was not strict, as is written [Bereishit 17:17 when Avraham fell on his face and laughed on hearing the news, in Lech Lecha] 'he laughed', while upon Sarah he was strict. Therefore they wrote בקרוביה, to say that Avraham was [laughing] in his heart while she said it among her relatives. [And therefore He was strict..]"
After citing Rashi, Torah Temimah continues:
"And if not for his words, once could suggest that they [the elders] changed this language because, in truth, it is difficult. For since she laughed internally, why should the verse state at all that she laughed? And in truth, in Midrash Rabba [?? I don't see it there], they sensed this, and said that with ruach hakodesh he [the malach?] knew that she laughed. And therefore they worried that Ptolmey would ask how they knew that, and the derasha of the Midrash Rabba that it was known via ruach hakodesh he would not have accepted. Therefore they wrote for him בקרוביה, such that she laughed in public..."Interestingly enough, in what we call the Septuagint today, many of these emendations are missing. The change of חמוד for חמור is there, as I discuss in a different parshablog post. But here is what we have on this pasuk in Vayera:
12 And Sarrha laughed in herself, saying, The thing has not as yet happened to me, even until now, and my lord is old.
3 comments:
Comment might be more appropriate for your earlier post, but I put it here anyway:
Since many of the changes listed in Megilla are not found in the Septuagint, and there are many changes there not mentioned by Chazal (e.g. an extra generation in the 'begats'), why are we sure that the Septuagint is the same Greek translation that Chazal call "Targum Shivim"? We know there were multiple Greek translations in the time of Chaza"l. How do we know the Septuagint isn't one of the other ones or one Chaza"l don't mention? We know from Qumran that there were Hebrew texts paralleling the Septuagint that Chaza"l never seem to mention. Perhaps the Septuagint was from a Greek translation for a sect Chazal ignored?
indeed. i was hinting at that as well.
the title Septuagint (70) is meant, though, to evoke this tale of 70 elders. and it is always possible that these discrepancies and lack of discrepancies evolved in the text, since it did not have the same untouchable quality of the Hebrew bible text.
The textual history of the LXX is long and vastly complicated, even more so than the Hebrew text, considering all the other languages it was translated into, from Coptic to Armenian and Gothic, and also the Old Latin and the Syro-Hexaplar in Aramaic, etc. And the Kaige-Th recension etc. Yes, of course, the Septuagint is referred to in this etiological legend. The legend of the LXX appears in Alexandrian Jewish sources long before it does in rabbinic sources, and evolved over time in rabbinic sources as well, with accretions and deletions. It appears, differently in each case, in yMeg 1 (72a); bMeg 9a (obviously derivative); Mechilta on 12:40; Midrash Hagadol Shmot 4:20; Avot dRabbi Natan B version ch.37; Sofrim 1:7; Yalqut Shimoni Breshit 3; Tanchuma Shmot 22. The changes vary from 10 to 18 in number. Only six or so are found in our LXX. It is possible that they were removed over time in the many alterations and recensions of the LXX (Emanuel Tov considered this likely), and also that the few actual changes inspired other imagined changes (Eliezer Segal seemed to be of this opinion.) I think both are likely, considering that in the largest rabbinic list there are 18. Not the only Alexandrian Jewish legend to find its way into Chazal at a later time. For the list of variants see Tov's article "The Rabbinic Tradition Concerning the 'Alterations' Inserted into the Greek Translation of the Torah etc." You can get it from Tov's site. -Shimon
Post a Comment