传统的锻造:希伯来圣经、抄写员以斯拉与犹太一神论的腐败-Ṭabarī、al-Thaʿlabī和IbnḤazm

IF 0.3 0 RELIGION
S. Donnelly
{"title":"传统的锻造:希伯来圣经、抄写员以斯拉与犹太一神论的腐败-Ṭabarī、al-Thaʿlabī和IbnḤazm","authors":"S. Donnelly","doi":"10.31743/biban.14511","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A widely distributed religious legend maintains that Ezra the scribe rewrote the Hebrew Bible sometime during the post-exilic period. The story is interpreted differently among its varying iterations. Some accounts view Ezra’s recovery of the Scriptures as an act of divine wonder while other versions insist that Ezra’s hand distorted the biblical text. Both outlooks are present in medieval Islamic writings. This article considers the polemical approach of three Muslim authors (e.g., al-Ṭabarī, al-Thaʿlabī, and Ibn Ḥazm) and their portraits of Ezra, including his role that led to a purported compromise of Jewish monotheism. The article explores Ibn Ḥazm’s claim that Ezra the scribe corrupted the biblical text. Several sources are examined (e.g., 4 Ezra, Porphyry, Justin Martyr, a Samaritan liturgical imprecation, and diverse rabbinic traditions) as plausible support for the charge that Ezra corrupted the Scriptures. A tale from Avot d’Rabbi Natan that features Ezra’s alleged scribal dots is posited as a reasonable source for the comment. Given Ibn Ḥazm’s interpretive outlook and Ezra’s prominent role in the story, the dots offer a new and sensible explanation.","PeriodicalId":52162,"journal":{"name":"Biblical Annals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Forging of a Tradition: The Hebrew Bible, Ezra the Scribe, and the Corruption of Jewish Monotheism According to the Writings of al-Ṭabarī, al-Thaʿlabī, and Ibn Ḥazm\",\"authors\":\"S. Donnelly\",\"doi\":\"10.31743/biban.14511\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A widely distributed religious legend maintains that Ezra the scribe rewrote the Hebrew Bible sometime during the post-exilic period. The story is interpreted differently among its varying iterations. Some accounts view Ezra’s recovery of the Scriptures as an act of divine wonder while other versions insist that Ezra’s hand distorted the biblical text. Both outlooks are present in medieval Islamic writings. This article considers the polemical approach of three Muslim authors (e.g., al-Ṭabarī, al-Thaʿlabī, and Ibn Ḥazm) and their portraits of Ezra, including his role that led to a purported compromise of Jewish monotheism. The article explores Ibn Ḥazm’s claim that Ezra the scribe corrupted the biblical text. Several sources are examined (e.g., 4 Ezra, Porphyry, Justin Martyr, a Samaritan liturgical imprecation, and diverse rabbinic traditions) as plausible support for the charge that Ezra corrupted the Scriptures. A tale from Avot d’Rabbi Natan that features Ezra’s alleged scribal dots is posited as a reasonable source for the comment. Given Ibn Ḥazm’s interpretive outlook and Ezra’s prominent role in the story, the dots offer a new and sensible explanation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biblical Annals\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biblical Annals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31743/biban.14511\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biblical Annals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31743/biban.14511","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一个广为流传的宗教传说认为,抄写员以斯拉在被流放后的某个时候重写了希伯来圣经。这个故事在不同的版本中有不同的解释。一些说法认为以斯拉恢复圣经是一个神圣的奇迹,而其他版本坚持认为以斯拉的手扭曲了圣经文本。这两种观点都出现在中世纪的伊斯兰著作中。这篇文章考虑了三位穆斯林作家(例如,al-Ṭabarī, al- tha - labi,和Ibn Ḥazm)的论战方法,以及他们对以斯拉的描绘,包括他所扮演的角色,导致了犹太人对一神论的妥协。这篇文章探讨了伊本Ḥazm关于文士以斯拉篡改圣经文本的说法。研究了几个来源(例如,以斯拉,波菲利,殉道者犹斯丁,撒玛利亚人的礼仪祈祷,以及各种拉比传统)作为对以斯拉破坏圣经的指控的合理支持。Avot d 'Rabbi Natan的一个故事以以斯拉所谓的抄写点为特色,被认为是评论的合理来源。考虑到伊本Ḥazm的解释观点和以斯拉在故事中的突出作用,这些点提供了一个新的、合理的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Forging of a Tradition: The Hebrew Bible, Ezra the Scribe, and the Corruption of Jewish Monotheism According to the Writings of al-Ṭabarī, al-Thaʿlabī, and Ibn Ḥazm
A widely distributed religious legend maintains that Ezra the scribe rewrote the Hebrew Bible sometime during the post-exilic period. The story is interpreted differently among its varying iterations. Some accounts view Ezra’s recovery of the Scriptures as an act of divine wonder while other versions insist that Ezra’s hand distorted the biblical text. Both outlooks are present in medieval Islamic writings. This article considers the polemical approach of three Muslim authors (e.g., al-Ṭabarī, al-Thaʿlabī, and Ibn Ḥazm) and their portraits of Ezra, including his role that led to a purported compromise of Jewish monotheism. The article explores Ibn Ḥazm’s claim that Ezra the scribe corrupted the biblical text. Several sources are examined (e.g., 4 Ezra, Porphyry, Justin Martyr, a Samaritan liturgical imprecation, and diverse rabbinic traditions) as plausible support for the charge that Ezra corrupted the Scriptures. A tale from Avot d’Rabbi Natan that features Ezra’s alleged scribal dots is posited as a reasonable source for the comment. Given Ibn Ḥazm’s interpretive outlook and Ezra’s prominent role in the story, the dots offer a new and sensible explanation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biblical Annals
Biblical Annals Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信