Texts in Conversation
Genesis 37 shows Jacob’s reaction to Joseph’s bloodied tunic, convinced him his son was eaten by an animal. The Aramaic translation in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan reverses this to say Joseph was not eaten, perhaps to harmonize difficulties with the Hebrew.
Share:
Genesis 37:33
Hebrew Bible
31 So they took Joseph’s tunic, killed a young goat, and dipped the tunic in the blood. 32 Then they brought the special tunic to their father and said, “We found this. Recognize* now whether it is your son’s tunic or not.” 33 He recognized it and exclaimed, “It is my son’s tunic! A wild animal has eaten him! Joseph has surely been torn to pieces!” 34 Then Jacob tore his clothes, put on sackcloth, and mourned for his son many days.
Date: 5th Century B.C.E. (Final composition) (based on scholarly estimates)
Source
Pseudo Jonathan Genesis 37:33
Targum
32 And they had the embroidered cloak taken by the sons of Zilpah and the sons of Bilhah, who brought it to their father and said, “We have found this. Identify, we pray, whether it is your son’s tunic or not.” 33 He identified it and said, “It is my son’s cloak. It was not a wild beast that devoured him; and he was not killed by men. But I see by the Holy Spirit that an evil woman is standing before him.” 34 Jacob rent his clothes, bound sackcloth on his loins, and mourned for his son many days.
Date: 300-1200 C.E. (based on scholarly estimates)
Source
Search:
Notes and References
"... Pseudo-Jonathan Genesis 37:33 also presents an apparently contradictory translation on account of its addition of the negative particle אל where the narrative lacks it in the Hebrew. In the Hebrew text, the brothers of Joseph come to Jacob with Joseph’s bloodied garment; they lead Jacob to believe that Joseph was torn to pieces by an animal, and at verse 33 Jacob exclaims in lamentation that Joseph is dead. In Pseudo-Jonathan, however (and in the Fragment Targumim and in Manuscript D), Jacob declares that Joseph is not dead, but rather alive. Again, the question arises: How did the targumist start with the Hebrew text and arrive at the Aramaic rendition in this case? Analysis of the passages shows that in this instance too the targumist encountered a number of textual incongruities that prompted him to look at the verse interpretively and to resolve the incongruities he perceived to emerge in the Hebrew. ..."
Zhakevich, Iosif J.
Contradictions and Coherence in Targum Pseudo-Jonathan
(pp. 54-55) Harvard University, 2016
* The use of references are not endorsements of their contents. Please read the entirety of the provided reference(s) to understand the author's full intentions regarding the use of these texts.
Your Feedback:
Leave a Comment
Anonymous comments are welcome. All comments are subject to moderation.