Targum Yonantan to Isaiah 53
Targum Yonatan to Isaiah 52:13 – 53:12
The text of the targum will be given above the translation so to avoid any confusion and footnotes are provided in areas for direction and explanation if needed. The purpose of this is to give the reader a knowledge of what this Targum actually says and who or what Isaiah 53 is about. See for yourself Israel is the topic. Have Fun!
הָא יַצלַח עַבדִי מְשִיחָא יִראַם וְיִסגֵי וְיִתקַף לַחדָא׃
52:13”Behold my anointed servant shall prosper, he shall be be raised up in praise and increase, and shall be very strong.”
דַהְוָה כְמָא דְסַבַרוּ לֵיה בֵית יִשׂרָאֵל יוֹמִין סַגִיאִין חְשוֹך בֵינֵי עַמְמַיָא חִזוְהוֹן וְזִיוְהוֹן מִבְנֵי אְנָשָא׃
52:14. ”Just as the House of Israel had hoped for this many days, Their appearences were very dark among the peoples; and their aspects were beyond that of humanity(lit. sons of men).”
מַלכִין כֵין יְבַדַר עַמְמִין סַגִיאִין עְלוֹהִי יִשתְקוּן יְשַוֹון יַדהוֹן עַל פוּמְהוֹן אְרֵי דְלָא אִשתַעִיאוּ לְהוֹן חְזוֹ וּדלָא שְמַעוּ אִסתַכַלוּ׃
52:15. ”Kings shall disperse him among many peoples, they shall be silent because of him, they shall place their hands over their mouths; for things that have not been told to them they will see, and that which they have not heard they will understand”[1]
דְרָע גְבוּרְתָא דַיוי מַן הֵימֵין לִבסוֹרְתַנָא דָא וּתקוֹף כִדֵין עַל מַן אִתגְלִיאַת׃
53:1. ”Who will believe our report? And to whom has the strength of the arm of Hashem revealed to.”[2]
דְפָרַן וְיִתרַבַא צַדִיקַיָא קֳדָמוֹהִי הָא כְלַבלַבִין וּכאִילָן דִמשַלַח שוּרשוֹהִי עַל נִגדִין דְמַיִין כֵין תוֹלְדָת קוּדשָא בְאַרעָא דַהֲוָת צָרִיכָה לֵיה לָא יִסגְיָן וְלָא אֵימְתֵיה אֵימַת הִדיוֹט וִיהֵי חַזוֵיה חוּלָא חִזוֵיה זִיו קוּדשָא זִיוֵיה דְכָל דְיִחזֵינֵיה יִסתַכַל בֵיה׃
53:2. “And the rightous will be lifted upbefore him, and behold, like plants which sprout and like a tree which spreads out its roots next to streams of water, so to will holy generations increase upon the land which needs him; His appearence is not a common appearence and his fear is not an ordinary fear, and his intelligence will be holy intelligence[3], such that everyone who looks at him will be considerate of him.”
כָל בְכֵין יְהֵי לְבוּסרָן וְיִפסוּק יְקָר מַלכְוָתָא יְהוֹן חַלָשִין וְדָווַן הָא כַאְנָש כֵיבִין לְמַרעִין וּכמָא דַהֲוָת מְסַלְקָא אַפֵי שְכִינְתָא וּמזָמַן מִנַנָא בְסִירִין וְלָא חְשִיבִין׃
53:3“Contempt and cease will be for all kingdoms in their glory; they will faint and mourn, behold as a man of sorrows and appointed for sicknesses as when the face of Shekinah( I.e. G-d) was taken aways from us, they are despised and not esteemed.”
בְדִילֵיה בְכֵין עַל חוֹבַנָא הוּא יִבעֵי וַעְוָיָתַנָא יִשתַבקָן וַאְנַחנָא חְשִיבִין כְתִישִין מַחָן מִן ק יוי וּמעֻנַן׃
53:4. ”Then he will beseech us concerning our sins and our iniquities will be forgiven upon his request,[4] They we were esteemed wounded, smitten before G-d and afflicted.”[5]
בְחוֹבַנָא אִתמְסַר וְהוּא יִבנֵי בֵית מַקדְשָא דְאִיתַחַל עְלַנָא בַעְוָיָתַנָא וּבאֻלפָנֵיה שְלָמָא יִסגֵי וּבִידִנתִינוֹהִי לְפִתגָמוֹהִי חוֹבַנָא יִשתַבקוּן לַנָא׃
53:5. ”And he will build the Temple which was profaned by our sins, and handed over for our iniquities, and by his teaching his peace will increase upon us in that we should attach ourselves to his word so that our sin will be forgiven.” [6]
לָקֳבֵיל אוֹרחֵיה גְלֵינָא כוּלַנָא כְעָנָא אִתבַדַרנָא גְבַר וּמִן קֻ יוי הְוָת רַעְוָא לְמִשבַק חוֹבֵי כוּלַנָא בְדִילֵיה׃
53:6. “All of us like sheep have scattered, we have gone into dispersion, everyone went his own way; and before Hashem it was his pleasure to forgive all of us upon his request.[7]”
פוּמֵיה בָעֵי וְהוּא מִיתָבַב וְעַד לָא פָתַח מִתקַבַל תַקִיפֵי עַמְמַיָא כְאִימְרָא לְנִכסְתָא יִמסַר דִקֳדָם גָזְזַהָא שָתְקָא וְלֵית לְקִבלֵיה וּכרַחלָא דְפָתַח פוּמֵיה וּממַלֵיל מִלָא׃
53:7 “He requests and he is answered and before he opens his mouth he is accepted; the strong among the people will be handed over like sheep to the slaughter, and like an ewe to the shearers is dumb, so there is not one in front of him who opens his mouth and speaks a word.”[8]
גָלְוָתַנָא פְרִישָן וּמִפוֹרעָנוּ יְקָרֵיב מִיִסוּרִין אְרֵי דְיִתעַבדָן לַנָא בְיוֹמוֹהִי מַן יִכוֹל לְאִשתְעָאָה יַעדֵי שוּלטָן עַמְמַיָא מֵאַרעָא דְיִשׂרָאֵל חוֹבִין דְחָבוּ עַמִי עַד לְוָתְהוֹן יִמטֵי׃
53:8"From bonds and retribution he will bring our dispersed near. Who will be able to count the wonders done in his days. For he will take away the dominion of the land of the peoples, to Israel, the sins of my people will be cast upon him.”
נִכסַיָא וְיִמסַר יָת רַשִיעַיָא לְגֵיהִנָם וְיָת עַתִירֵי דַאְנַסוּ בְמוֹתָא דְאַבדָנָא בְדִיל דְלָא יִתקַייְמוּן חִטאָה וְלָא יְמַלְלוּן נִכלִין עָבְדֵי בְפוּמְהוֹן׃
53:9. “The wicked will be taken to Gehennom and those with rich possessions will be robbed to the death with corruption, lest those who commit sin establish and speak of their possessions with their mouths.”
שְאָרָא וּמִן קֳדָם יוי הְוָת רַעְוָא לְמִצרַף וּלדַכָאָה יָת דְעַמֵיה בְדִיל לְנַקָאָה מֵחוֹבִין נַפשְהוֹן יִחזוֹן מְשִיחְהוֹן יִסגוֹן בְנִין וּבנָן יוֹרְכוּן יוֹמִין בְמַלכוּת וְעָבְדֵי אוֹרָיתָא דַיוי בִרעוּתֵיה יַצלְחוּן׃
53:10."Yet before HaShem it was His pleasure to cleanse and refine the remnant of his people, in order to purify their soul from their transgressions; so that they will see the kingdom of their Messiah, sons and daughters shall increase for those who practice the Torah of HaShem and they shall have prolonged days and prosper in his pleasure”
בְפוֹרעָנוּת מִשִעבוּד עַמְמַיָא יְשֵיזֵיב נַפשְהוֹן יִחזוֹן יְזַכֵי סָנְאֵיהוֹן יִסבְעוּן מִבִזַת מַלכֵיהוֹן בְחָכמְתֵיה זַכָאִין בְדִיל לְשַעבָדָא סַגִיאִין לְאוֹרָיתָא וְעַל חוֹבֵיהוֹן הוּא יִבעֵי׃
53:11 “From the slavery among the other peoples their soul will be delivered, their adversaries shall see their retribution. They will be satistfied with plunder from the other kings and through his wisdom many will be subject to the Torah and he will beseech concerning their sins and see to it that the innocent are counted as innocent.”
עַמְמִין סַגִיאִין וְיָת נִכסֵי בְכֵין אְפַלֵיג לֵיה בִיזַת דִמסַר לְמוֹתָא כַרכִין תַקִיפִין יְפַלֵיג עְדָאָה חְלָף עַל נַפשֵיה וְיָת מָרוֹדַיָא שַעבֵיד לְאוֹרָיתָא וְהוּא יִשתְבֵיק חוֹבִין יִבעֵי וּלמָרוֹדַיָא בְדִילֵיה׃
53:12. "Then I will divide him the plunder of many peoples, and he shall divide the spoils, the possesions of the mighty fortresses; because he exposed his soul to death and subjected those who rebelled [againsts G-d], to the Torah. Yet he will beseech many for their sins and those who rebelled shall be forgiven.”
[1] The prophet concludes his speech with this verse.
[2] The Gentile Kings begin their speech with this verse.
[3] I.e. Knowledge of the Torah
[4] The people will come to the Jews and the Jews will ask G-d to forgive their sins and iniquities
[5] Speech by Gentile kings ends in this verse.
[6] The Prophet speaks on behalf of Israel or Israel is speaking as a whole. The speaker takes over in this verse and continues to the end of the chapter.
[7] Wording of Aramaic unclear. “his request” implies the prophet’s request to G-d to forgive the people of Israel.
[8] As a condition of our forgiveness the Jews must endure exile as explained in verses 9 though 12
posted by Menachem @ 4:50 PM
12 Comments
12 Comments:
Hey Eli, it's awesome that you started up a countermissionary blog :)
I wish I could have kept mine up, but with the stalker and a few other things I've had to go back into lurker mode.
Yoshi good to hear from you man. I had to do something. When you shut yours down i had to pick up where you left off with yours. i will have more up after I fix the Aramaic on the Targum here. Format troubles as always.
It appears that the Targum is a commentary and not a translation. What of the literal translation of Isa. 53? Commentaries are not inspired of God, are they?
Dear Anonymous,
The Targum is what you would call a translation not a commentary. the word Targum comes from the word Meturgeman which means "translator." The Hebrew text of isaiah 53 and the transaltion found in Targum Yonatan line up in accordance to what is being discussed in the chapter. So to say this is a simply a commentary would be in error with the facts.
Beside the Targum, Can you site one more, just one Jewish writing befor Rashi did it in the 11th century that says Isaiah 53 is about Israel?
See Origens Contra celesia which was written circa 200 CE. Not only was Origen aware of it he cites it as their view on the matter
Please try not to obscure the significance, if that’s what you’re trying to do, of the word you render "anointed servant"; it is the word Meshiach, or "Messiah"; furthermore we know this particular Messiah isn't some normal king or something because of the context: Judaism is messianic, if not today accepting of Joshua. (J like “Y”)
If you'd really like to contend on this I could start citing all the Jewish commentators and sources, ancient till modern. I find it funny how the Aramaic here specifically interprets this as referring to the Messiah, and then re-writes the passage interpretatively to refer to the plural after referring to the singular Messiah which the Hebrew refers to: seems like an interpretative clash, but the former is in-line with the ancients.
I know you’re probably annoyed by now with how often quoted it is, but it’s a Jewish authority, and I’ll repeat it loudly for the wind to carry to the world, the quote by Rabbi Moshe Alshech (16th century):
“Our rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view.”
It’s significant that he’s telling that all in his time affirm the traditional Messianic interpretation, contra Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Radak.
He’s in agreement with Moses ben Nachman (also known as “Nachmanides” or as the “Ramban”), the Midrash, Saadia Gaion, Maimonedes…of course we read in these writings various eisegeses of “musts” and signs of their own version of Messiah’s coming. : D At least the orthodox are consistent with Biblical interpretation, with the prophecies and with the 1st century Rabbis: it says that the Messiah would come and be cut off before the destruction of the temple (and this was written after the first destruction, indicating it would be rebuilt…unless you would like to deny that Daniel was written by Daniel, in which case you’d be an apostate Jew not worth arguing for, having betrayed God); although they deny that the Messiah came (hence couldn’t have been cut off) because the Talmud records that when the last Jewish authority in Judah was removed by order of Rome they yelled “woe to us, because the scepter has departed from Judah, and the Messiah is not come”. Coincidentally Jesus was growing up at this time…in Judah. Whether or not you’re orthodox, that is nevertheless, unless perhaps you’re kairite, the origin and foundation of your faith; and if you are kairite you know the passage is Messianic.
And just so you don’t get too much of an itch to fight that Daniel is to be ignored as a mere writing, I note it was included with the prophets until it was assigned later, post-1st century.
And just so you don’t try to frame this as “Christian” vs. “Jewish”, the New Testament texts are thoroughly Jewish in though; the Church’s current Gentile nature is due to the overwhelming presence of Gentiles within it, though I would argue there are not many who are truly believers in the sense of believing the Word obediently, old and new testaments. And I don’t say “Old Testament” with disgust or as if it is a lesser thing—we are to venerate gray hairs, a crown of wisdom. : )
Read Zechariah 12:10, in the Hebrew, without polemically altering it like some translations: and note the speaker is God through the prophet, yet speaking of Himself, as one Person, He then switches to the third person singular masculine (in anglo-terminology for the audience that doesn’t get Hebrew)…still speaking of the same Person He called Himself…confusing? No…it’s provoking, it’s to provoke you to think. Like “let us reason together”.
You countermissionaries think there are just a bunch of people out to get you, trying to glorify themselves and who, by their teachings, pose to bring you harm: and in a sense I agree with you! There are a LOT of poor students of the Bible and wolves who are themselves deceived. However you’re not fighting gentiles, you’re fighting with the NT writers—Jews who predate Rabbinism—a Rabbinism that billed itself as 1st century, but which really took authority between the fourth and sixth centuries; your fight is with Jews who opposed the abuses and knit-picky avoid-the-commands Pharisees. Jews like Saul who was a student of Gamaliel and who I’ve never seen any valid rebuttal to, the only option being to countermissionaries to frame this as a Gentile-vs.-Jew, rather than Jew vs. Jew, Ancient Jew vs. polemical-reinterpretative Jew, argument. Texts full of Jewish disputations, terms, themse, thoughts, and methods: like Midot, I’ve learned.
Remember, though, that the God would go to the Gentiles? A people who eats pigs flesh to provoke Israel to jealousy because of her idolatries? Remember that the outer courts are for the worship of the Gentiles? Nevertheless they’re ingrafts into the original tree, but God may at any time decide to break them off and re-graft the Jews. The “Christian” terminology is even, truly, Jewish. There are Jewish believers already.
My heritage is Jewish, my religious heritage (what I knew about God when I was little) was mostly senseless superstition (from a Catholic grandmother’s and her sister’s origin); but through mother’s and father’s lines, a believer in the word; one of my grandfathers died of a rare disease that pinpoints his family to a specific locale amongst a particular population of German Jews (to the North); my other grandfather grandfather’s parents were silent non-attending “Methodists”, or so the community they lived in supposed; my grandmother is a Northern Italian (in ancestry) who is thereby thought to be from amongst the Jews of that region; my reading of scripture started in the Old Testament, and was busily occupied there for a very long time, so that I understand the New Testament in that light, and where the NT sheds light on the OT mysteries, it is wonderful: however often it (the NT) is recounting what is consistent with the old Jewish interpretations, not fabricating something new.
We who argue over the identity of the Christ, amongst the Jews, showing that He must have come, according to God’s promise, don’t do so for our glory, nor for fun: it’s not; it is not for joy that we unsettled another’s comfort; we do so in the hopes of belief and trust in Him, that you will return to the faith of the ancients, and believe what was said of His coming, and cease to divide a grammatically singular person into two because of an unwillingness to accept that He would both suffer, and be yet glorious. We do so out of love for our brothers—who sneer at us for our belief call us traitors; who’s heritage is one of slanderous polemical stories; of racism against the gentiles and of pride unsubject to the Word of God.
I hope to see the mouths of the Rabbis who say they trump God, who vest in themselves the authorities rightfully belonging to only the priests, and who have to play with the text to fit their interpretations into it, stopped; for the liberation of Israel, and so that mourning toward repentance and turning to Him might begin. I hope you’ll come around, not so much by men’s arguments, but through actually believing what you read, in reading it consistently for what is says.
well the "a guy" let us contend this claim. here is a good place for a formal debate http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/
now on to some of your claims.
[i][b]"Please try not to obscure the significance, if that’s what you’re trying to do, of the word you render "anointed servant"; it is the word Meshiach, or "Messiah";"[/i][/b]
Why is it that ignorance begets ignorance? Anyhow When I [b][u]Translated[/b][/u](emphasis mine) the term Moshiach as it is supposed to be done it does well enough to describe israel as a anointed servant. Besides the entire 53 chapter is about Israel as given by the targumist. What you are focusing on is the 13th verse of the former chapter when in verse 14 it goes to mentioned in the very next verse as hoping to be raised up, praised and prospering.
My question to you is: Why do you transliterate instead of translate here? Convenience perhaps? Or, lack of working knowledge in translation?
[i][b]"furthermore we know this particular Messiah isn't some normal king or something because of the context: Judaism is messianic, if not today accepting of Joshua. (J like “Y”)"[/u][/b]
Really?! he is not a normal person how odd. What is he supposed to have a third arm or a third leg? That is absurd and against everything the Tanach says about him.
Judaism is messianic in fact I await the coming of the Moshiach every day.
[b][i]"If you'd really like to contend on this I could start citing all the Jewish commentators and sources, ancient till modern.[/i][/b]
Let me guess you will quote the usual Yaphet ben ali, who was a Karaite not a Rabbi. Moshe ibn Crispin, who wasnt even a rabbi but a poet. And so on.
[b][i]"I find it funny how the Aramaic here specifically interprets this as referring to the Messiah, and then re-writes the passage interpretatively to refer to the plural after referring to the singular Messiah which the Hebrew refers to: seems like an interpretative clash, but the former is in-line with the ancients.[/i][/b]
What I think is funny is that the whole thing in the Targum talks about israel as being the servant of G-d.
now for your claim about Moshe Al-Sheikh
[b][i]"“Our rabbis with one voice accept and affirm the opinion that the prophet is speaking of the Messiah, and we shall ourselves also adhere to the same view.”"[/b][/i]
the problem with is that you did not quote him fully. he is not saying anything of the sorts. here is what he goes on to say next:
[u][b]“for the Messiah is of course, David, who was ‘anointed’ as is well known…”[/b][/u]
He explains how it applies to King David
he then goes on to apply 53:9 to Moses
One source down so many more misquoted sources to go.
[i][b]"It’s significant that he’s telling that all in his time affirm the traditional Messianic interpretation, contra Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Radak."[/b][/i]
So you pick and choose whihc one you accept and which one you do not. I posit that you do not accept any of them as authoritative but are simply misquoting out of convenience.
The rest is just a wast of bandwidth and my time it would just be me going through one at a time and tearing them down. if you want a formal debate go to the website above and go to "the gym" section to propose a formal challenge.
Greetings Chaverim,
My wife and I have been doing the counter-missionary fight for years now and glad to see the fight and fighters are growing.
Annon posts a desire to see what Is 53 means,but neglects to realize there are more chapters to the book than just the one.
You want to see a commentary about how this is,in fact,Israel?Look at a previous chapter.
Is41:8: 8. But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend.
There's your servant.
To A guy,here is the plural in Is 53,showing it can not be a single person as the subject.
There are two verses which use plural words in Isaiah 53 which would suggest this chapter is not speaking of an individual and indeed the People of Israel: The first is Is 53:8 which in the Arstcrolls Stone Edition Tanakh translates thus:
Now that he has been released from captivity and judgement, who could have imagined such a generation? For he had been removed from the land of the living*, an affliction upon them that was my people's sin.
The Hebrew of the underlined is as follows:
MiFesha Ami Nega Lamo
One will have trouble finding the word Lamo in a Hebrew dictionary as did I, so I looked the word up in a Hebrew Concordance to the Bible and found that it means "Unto/upon/to them". It is used 54 times in the Bible and in all but 3 cases even the King James Version translated it as "Them,Unto,Upon,To
Them". Those exceptions are the following:
Genesis 9:26, Genesis 9:27, and Isaiah 53:8.
The places the KJV translated it properly are the following:
Deuteronomy:
32:32, 32:35, 33:2
Isaiah:
16:4, 23:1, 26:14, 26:16, 30:5, 35:8, 43:8, 44:7, 44:15, 48:21
Psalms:
2:4, 28:8, 44:3(4), 44:10(11), 49:13(14), 55:19(20), 56:7(8), 58:4(5), 59:8(9),
64:5(6) twice, 66:7, 73:10, 73:18, 78:24, 78:66, 80:6(7), 88:8(9), 99:7, 119:165,
Habakkuk:
2:7
Proverbs:
23:20
Job:
3:14, 6:19, 14:21, 15:28, 22:17, 22:19, 24:16, 24:17, 30:13, 39:4
Lamentations:
1:19, 1:22, 4:10, 4:15
The next verse is Isaiah 53:9 which reads in SET (Stone Edition Tanakh) as follows:
He submitted himself to his grave like wicked men; and the wealthy (submitted) to his deaths......
The Hebrew of the words in red is B'motav and is clearly plural.
Both the "Upon them" and the "In his deaths" would show any logically thinking person that this cannot be referring to an individual. When I presented the word B'motav to a missionary he responded thus:
"Rediculous, How can the Jews die for their own sins?"
To which I responded:
"Ezekiel 18:1-4: 'Why do you relate this parable upon the land of Israel, saying, The fathers eat sour grapes, but the teeth of the sons are set on edge! As I live...that there will no longer be anyone among you who uses this parable in Israel. Behold....The soul that sins---it shall die.'
No one can atone for someone else's sin. Only the sinner can. And in many cases the death of the sinner is the price he pays for his sin.
Messiah Truth website has some good information on this subject. There is an article on the Targum http://messiahtruth.com/targum.html
It says that Targum Yonathan is midrash -- a commentary as much as a translation. Whoever posted that it wasn't commentary doesn't seem to understand the concept of midrash. http://www.messiahtruth.com/midrash.html
Also, whoever said that Jewish sources pre-Rashi all had Isaiah 53 speaking about the messiah don't know much about Jewish sources! The Talmud itself says the servant is Israel. The Talmud pre-dates Rashi by around 1000 years!
"Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 13:2
I have eaten my honeycomb with my honey because the Israelites poured out their soul to die in the captivity as it is said because he poured out his soul to death and with transgressors he was counted and he bore the sins of many and interceded for the transgressors. "
and
"
Brachot 5a
Raba, in the name of R. Sahorah, in the name of R. Huna, says: If the Holy One, blessed be He, is pleased with a man, he crushes him with painful sufferings. For it is said: And the Lord was pleased; he crushed him by disease. (Isaiah 53:10) Now, you might think that this is so even if he did not accept them with love. Therefore it is said: To see if his soul would offer itself as a guilt offering. (Isaiah 53:10) Even as the guilt offering must be brought by consent, so also the sufferings must be endured with consent. And if he did accept them, what is his reward? He will see his seed, prolong his days. (Isaiah 53:10) And more than that, his knowledge [of the Torah] will endure with him. For it is said: The purpose of the Lord will prosper in his hand. (Isaiah 53:10))"
The whole Rashi invented Israel as the servant myth comes from a 19th century Christian book.
i have simple question. i was showing these interpretations to a christian friend and he asked how it could apply to israel because that would mean god had broken a covenant not to hurt israel while they were being righteous. i'm not familiar enough with the covenants so i'm curious what the answer is. thank you:)
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home