Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Correct translation
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
In the lamsa's translation for job 2-7, ' so satan went forth from the presence of the lord, and smote job with cancer...'
Is this the correct translation' with cancer'?
sean Wrote:In the lamsa's translation for job 2-7, ' so satan went forth from the presence of the lord, and smote job with cancer...'
Is this the correct translation' with cancer'?

Shlama Akhi Sean:
The Aramaic phrase used in Codex Ambrosiano (Peshitta AN"K) is ?????????????? ?????????????? which means "evil boils or evil ulcers". The Hebrew shares the root "shakhan". However, the Reuben-Alcalay Hebrew-English dictionary defines this root "shakhan" to mean "hot". So by deferring to the Hebrew TN"K rather than to the Peshitta AN"K (which is a translation) it would appear that Job had nasty hot boils from head to foot. Job would have felt like he was on fire.
A side point. The Book of Revelation 16:2 uses this phrase ?????????????? ?????????????? for the "nasty ulcers" that are punishment for receiving the mark of the beast. Remember this is a side point, and the only reason I'm mentioning the Book of Revelation, is because it's the only place that the word ?????????????? is used in the New Testament, albeit the Western Five. Also, the same phrase is used.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
Thanks,stephen, which old testament would you recommend I read. Maybe I should learn how to read aramaic
sean Wrote:Thanks,stephen, which old testament would you recommend I read. Maybe I should learn how to read aramaic

Shlama Akhi Sean:
Actually, I just read the New King James Version in the Sefer HaBritot (Hebrew and English Bible). When I want to get the specific meaning of a word or phrase in the TN"K portion, I can read the Hebrew along side of it. I have downloaded the Peshitta AN"K and it's linked on <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->.
Quite honestly, I depend heavily upon the use of Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicons. I make good use of the Strong's Concordance mainly because I've memorized key words in the KJV. The Strong's Concordance quotes from the KJV. It helps to learn the Hebrew/Aramaic aleph-bet.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->
Hi, Stephen!

Stephen Silver Wrote:I have downloaded the Peshitta AN"K and it's linked on <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->.
Are you referring to the Ambrosiano Codex link, or is there something I'm missing?

Thanks!

-Doug "Whitey" Jackson
Doug Wrote:Hi, Stephen!

Stephen Silver Wrote:I have downloaded the Peshitta AN"K and it's linked on <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->.
Are you referring to the Ambrosiano Codex link, or is there something I'm missing?

Thanks!

-Doug "Whitey" Jackson

Shlama Akhi Whitey:
Yes. You can access the Ambrosiano Codex pages from the LINKS page, under the heading Manuscripts at <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->.

The book of Job is on page a130.jpg. The phrase in Job 2:7 ?????????????? ?????????????? appears in the third column from the right, beginning with the last word on the 8th line, counting from the top of the column.

This same phrase ?????????????? ?????????????? is in Revelation 16:2 and appears in both the Harklean Version (1905 UBS) as well as the Crawford Codex transcribed by John Gwynn.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
In Revelation 16:2 Lamsa has "malignant sore", again suggesting cancer.

Otto
ograabe Wrote:In Revelation 16:2 Lamsa has "malignant sore", again suggesting cancer.

Otto

Shlama Akhi Otto:
So What? So Lamsa "translated" ?????????????? ?????????????? as "malignant sore". We're dealing with the Hebrew TN"K which was "translated" into Aramaic. Isn't it common sense to defer to the Hebrew in Job rather than to Lamsa's translation from the Peshitta in either the book of Job or the book of Revelation? Does every instance of ?????????????? in Exodus and Leviticus mean "cancer"? Does not ?????????????? mean "nasty/evil"? George Lamsa is not always 100% in his translation, is he? What gives?

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->
I just made an observation because it seems that Lamsa was somewhat consistent in these texts that he translated decades apart.

Otto
ograabe Wrote:I just made an observation because it seems that Lamsa was somewhat consistent in these texts that he translated decades apart.

Otto

Shlama Akhi Otto:
No doubt that Dr. Lamsa was consistent but it still remains that the word is the very same as in Exodus and Leviticus. All I'm saying is that the Hebrew came first and when this word was first translated it was translated into Aramaic in the Peshitta AN"K. The book of Revelation followed much later.
Any translation straddles the fine line between paraphrase and literal. It's true that not all words and phrases can be translated literally, especially when the original language contains "idioms". Unless it can be established that the original phrase can only mean cancer then room must be made for circumstantial variations on the precise meaning. In the case of ?????????????? ?????????????? isn't it sound to defer to the origin of the word and phrase? The word ?????????????? shares its root with the Hebrew "shakhan". This word, which is translated in the KJV as "boil" is found in Exodus 9:9-11, Exodus 9:11 (pleural), Leviticus 8:31, 13:18-20, 23, II Kings 20:7, Isaiah 38:21 and Job 2:7. The word "shakhan" does not mean "cancer" in all of the listed occurences. Leprosy is not the same as melanoma. Melanoma is not always visible on the skin. However, leprosy and boils do. It's not to say that the word cannot mean cancer/melanoma but it does not always mean cancer. So, in spite of Dr. Lamsa's "consistency" it stands to reason that there may be other translations and still be consistent to the context.

Shlama,
Stephen
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">http://www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- m -->