a theologico-political treatise [part ii]-第16部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！





his　son　every　day。　So　Absalom　fled；　and　went　to　Geshur；　and　was　there　three



years。〃　（82）　I　know　that　I　have　remarked　other　passages　of　the　same　kind；



but　I　cannot　recall　them　at　the　moment。







（83）　That　the　marginal　notes　which　are　found　continually　in　the　Hebrew



Codices　are　doubtful　readings　will；　I　think；　be　evident　to　everyone　who　has



noticed　that　they　often　arise　from　the　great　similarity；　of　some　of　the



Hebrew　letters；　such　for　instance；　as　the　similarity　between　Kaph　and　Beth；



Jod　and　Van；　Daleth　and　Reth；　&c。　（84）　For　example；　the　text　in



2　Sam。　v：24；　runs　〃in　the　time　when　thou　hearest；〃　and　similarly　in



Judges　xxi：22；　〃And　it　shall　be　when　their　fathers　or　their　brothers　come



unto　us　often；〃　the　marginal　version　is　〃come　unto　us　to　complain。〃







（85）　So　also　many　various　readings　have　arisen　from　the　use　of　the　letters



named　mutes；　which　are　generally　not　sounded　in　pronunciation；　and　are　taken



promiscuously；　one　for　the　other。　（86）　For　example；　in　Levit。　xxv：29；　it　is



written；　〃The　house　shall　be　established　which　is　not　in　the　walled　city；〃



but　the　margin　has　it；　〃which　is　in　a　walled　city。〃







（87）　Though　these　matters　are　self…evident；　＇Endnore　6＇；　it　is　necessary；　to



answer　the　reasonings　of　certain　Pharisees；　by　which　they　endeavour　to



convince　us　that　the　marginal　notes　serve　to　indicate　some　mystery；　and　were



added　or　pointed　out　by　the　writers　of　the　sacred　books。　（88）　The　first　of



these　reasons；　which；　in　my；　opinion；　carries　little　weight；　is　taken　from



the　practice　of　reading　the　Scriptures　aloud。







（89）　If；　it　is　urged；　these　notes　were　added　to　show　various　readings　which



could　not　be　decided　upon　by　posterity；　why　has　custom　prevailed　that　the



marginal　readings　should　always　be　retained？　（90）　Why　has　the　meaning　which



is　preferred　been　set　down　in　the　margin　when　it　ought　to　have　been



incorporated　in　the　text；　and　not　relegated　to　a　side　note？







（91）　The　second　reason　is　more　specious；　and　is　taken　from　the　nature　of　the



case。　（92）　It　is　admitted　that　faults　have　crept　into　the　sacred　writings　by



chance　and　not　by　design；　but　they　say　that　in　the　five　books　the　word　for　a



girl　is；　with　one　exception；　written　without　the　letter　〃he；〃　contrary　to



all　grammatical　rules；　whereas　in　the　margin　it　is　written　correctly



according　to　the　universal　rule　of　grammar。　（93）　Can　this　have　happened　by



mistake？　Is　it　possible　to　imagine　a　clerical　error　to　have　been　committed



every；　time　the　word　occurs？　（94）　Moreover；　it　would　have　been　easy；　to



supply　the　emendation。　（95）　Hence；　when　these　readings　are　not　accidental



or　corrections　of　manifest　mistakes；　it　is　supposed　that　they　must　have　been



set　down　on　purpose　by　the　original　writers；　and　have　a　meaning。　（96）



However；　it　is　easy　to　answer　such　arguments；　as　to　the　question　of　custom



having　prevailed　in　the　reading　of　the　marginal　versions；　I　will　not　spare



much　time　for　its　consideration：　I　know　not　the　promptings　of　superstition；



and　perhaps　the　practice　may　have　arisen　from　the　idea　that　both　readings



were　deemed　equally　good　or　tolerable；　and　therefore；　lest　either　should　be



neglected；　one　was　appointed　to　be　written；　and　the　other　to　be　read。　（97）



They　feared　to　pronounce　judgment　in　so　weighty　a　matter　lest　they　should



mistake　the　false　for　the　true；　and　therefore　they　would　give　preference　to



neither；　as　they　must　necessarily　have　done　if　they　had　commanded　one　only



to　be　both　read　and　written。　（98）　This　would　be　especially　the　case　where



the　marginal　readings　were　not　written　down　in　the　sacred　books：　or　the



custom　may　have　originated　because　some　things　though　rightly　written　down



were　desired　to　be　read　otherwise　according　to　the　marginal　version；　and



therefore　the　general　rule　was　made　that　the　marginal　version　should　be



followed　in　reading　the　Scriptures。　（99）　The　cause　which　induced　the　scribes



to　expressly　prescribe　certain　passages　to　be　read　in　the　marginal　version；



I　will　now　touch　on；　for　not　all　the　marginal　notes　are　various　readings；



but　some　mark　expressions　which　have　passed　out　of　common　use；　obsolete



words　and　terms　which　current　decency　did　not　allow　to　be　read　in　a　public



assembly。　（100）　The　ancient　writers；　without　any　evil　intention；　employed　no



courtly　paraphrase；　but　called　things　by　their　plain　names。　（101）



Afterwards；　through　the　spread　of　evil　thoughts　and　luxury；　words　which



could　be　used　by　the　ancients　without　offence；　came　to　be　considered



obscene。　（102）　There　was　no　need　for　this　cause　to　change　the　text　of



Scripture。　（103）　Still；　as　a　concession　to　the　popular　weakness；　it　became



the　custom　to　substitute　more　decent　terms　for　words　denoting　sexual



intercourse；　exereta；　&c。；　and　to　read　them　as　they　were　given　in　the



margin。







（104）　At　any　rate；　whatever　may　have　been　the　origin　of　the　practice　of



reading　Scripture　according　to　the　marginal　version；　it　was　not　that　the



true　interpretation　is　contained　therein。　（105）　For　besides　that；　the



Rabbins　in　the　Talmud　often　differ　from　the　Massoretes；　and　give　other



readings　which　they　approve　of；　as　I　will　shortly　show；　certain　things　are



found　in　the　margin　which　appear　less　warranted　by　the　uses　of　the　Hebrew



language。　（106）　For　example；　in　2　Samuel　xiv：22；　we　read；　〃In　that　the　king



hath　fulfilled　the　request　of　his　servant；〃　a　construction　plainly



regular；　and　agreeing　with　that　in　chap。　xvi。　（107）　But　the　margin　has　it



〃of　thy　servant；〃　which　does　not　agree　with　the　person　of　the　verb。　（108）



So；　too；　chap。　xvi：25　of　the　same　book；　we　find；　〃As　if　one　had　inquired　at



the　oracle　of　God；〃　the　margin　adding　〃someone〃　to　stand　as　a　nominative　to



the　verb。　（109）　But　the　correction　is　not　apparently　warranted；　for　it　is



a　common　practice；　well　known　to　grammarians　in　the　Hebrew　language；　to　use



the　third　person　singular　of　the　active　verb　impersonally。







（110）　The　second　argument　advanced　by　the　Pharisees　is　easily　answered　from



what　has　just　been　said；　namely；　that　the　scribes　besides　the　various



readings　called　attention　to　obsolete　words。　（111）　For　there　is　no　doubt



that　in　Hebrew　as　in　other　languages；　changes　of　use　made　many　words



obsolete　and　antiquated；　and　such　were　found　by　the　later　scribes　in　the



sacred　books　and　noted　by　them　with　a　view　to　the　books　being　publicly　read



according　to　custom。　（112）　For　this　reason　the　word　nahgar　is　always　found



marked　because　its　gender　was　originally　common；　and　it　had　the　same　meaning



as　the　Latin　juvenis　（a　young　person）。　（113）　So　also　the　Hebrew　capital　was



anciently　called　Jerusalem；　not　Jerusalaim。　（114）　As　to　the　pronouns　himself



and　herself；　I　think　that　the　later　scribes　changed　vau　into　jod　（a　very



frequent　change　in　Hebrew）　when　they　wished　to　express　the　feminine　gender；



but　that　the　ancients　only　distinguished　the　two　genders　by　a　change　of



vowels。　（115）　I　may　also　remark　that　the　irregular　tenses　of　certain　verbs



differ　in　the　ancient　and　modern　forms；　it　being　formerly　considered　a　mark



of　elegance　to　employ　certain　letters　agreeable　to　the　ear。







（116）　In　a　word；　I　could　easily　multiply　proofs　of　this　kind　if　I　were　not



afraid　of　abusing　the　patience　of　the　reader。　（117）　Perhaps　I　shall　be　asked



how　I　became　acquainted　with　the　fact　that　all　these　expressions　are



obsolete。　（118）　I　reply　that　I　have　found　them　in　the　most　ancient　Hebrew



writers　in　the　Bible　itself；　and　that　they　have　not　been　imitated　by



subsequent　authors；　and　thus　they　are　recognized　as　antiquated；　though　the



language　in　which　they　occur　is　dead。　（119）　But　perhaps　someone　may　press



the　question　why；　if　it　be　true；　as　I　say；　that　the　marginal　notes　of　the



Bible　generally　mark　various　readings；　there　are　never　more　than　two



readings　of　a　passage；　that　in　the　text　and　that　in　the　margin；　instead　of



three　or　more；　and　further；　how　the　scribes　can　have　hesitated　between　two



readings；　one　of　which　is　evidently　contrary　to　grammar；　and　the　other　a



plain　correction。







（120）　The　answer　to　these　questions　also　is　easy：　I　will　premise　that　it　is



almost　certain　that　there　once　were　more　various　readings　than　those　now



recorded。　（121）　For　instance；　one　finds　many　in　the　Talmud　which　the



Massoretes　have　neglected；　and　are　so　different　one　from　the　other　that



even　the　superstitious　editor　of　the　Bomberg　Bible　confesses　that　he　cannot



harmonize　them。　（122）　〃We　cannot　say　anything；〃　he　writes；　〃except　what　we



have　said　above；　namely；　that　the　Talmud　is　generally　in　contradiction　to



the　Massorete。〃　（123）　So　that　we　are　nor　bound　to　hold　that　there　never　were



more　than　two　readings　of　any　passage；　yet　I　am　willing　to　admit；　and



indeed　I　believe　that　more　than　two　readings　are　never　found：　and　for　the



following　reasons：…（124）　（I。）　The　cause　of　the　differences　of　reading　only



admits　of　two；　being　generally　the　similarity　of　certain　letters；　so　that



the　question　resolved　itself　into　which　should　be　written　Beth；　or　Kaf；



Jod　or　Vau；　Daleth　or　Reth：　cases　which　are　constantly　occurring；　and



frequently　yielding　a　fairly　good　meaning　whichever　alternative　be　adopted。



（125）　Sometimes；　too；　it　is　a　question　whether　a　syllable　be　long　or　short；



quantity　being　determined　by　the　letters　called　mutes。　（126）　Moreover；　we



never　asserted　that　all　the　marginal　versions；　without　exception；　marked



various　readings；　on　the　contrary；　we　have　stated　that　many　were　due　to



motives　of　decency　or　a　desire　to　explain　obsolete　words。　（127）　（II。）　I　am



inclined　to　attribute　t