書信與論戰集（CSEL） 第 56 章 第 4/7 段

'Go, get up hence, you and your people, whom (quos) you have led out of the land of Egypt' — not 'whom' (quem) you have led out: which is so customary that it is more rarely said otherwise. 'And the Lord said: put off the robes of your glories and your ornament, and I will show you what I am going to do to you (tibi).' He ended the expression from the plural to the singular number, because they were many and were a people, just as he had said to them: 'You are a people of stiff neck'; he did not say 'you (singular) are a people,' but 'you (plural) are a people,' although 'you (plural)' is of the plural number, and 'people' of the singular number. 'If I have found grace in your sight, let my Lord walk together with us': as though he speaks of another. These expressions are constant, but when it is said to God, it is thought to be said by the Father concerning the Son.

But when such things were said to Pharaoh, and to Joseph, and to others in many places, the kind of expression was understood. 'Lest ever you make a covenant with those who sit upon the earth' — as if he should say 'have their seats,' which means 'dwell.' 'And you shall not make for yourself molten gods.' It is an expression signifying the whole from a part; for not because he named only 'molten' gods did he permit carved, hammered, and earthen ones, or any kind of images or of made-up gods of whatever sort, to be made. 'Everything that opens the womb is mine — the male things': that is, 'everything that opens the womb shall be mine of those things which are male.' 'The firstling of the beast of burden you shall redeem with a sheep.' And this too is 'the whole from a part';

for not, if a beast of burden be any animal whatsoever whose flesh is rejected as unclean, is it therefore not to be redeemed, or to be redeemed with something other than a sheep. 'You shall not slay the blood of my sacrificial offerings upon leaven': the expression is surely 'you shall slay the blood' for what means 'by slaying you shall pour out.' 'And the sacrifice of the solemnity of the Passover shall not sleep until morning.' He said 'shall sleep' for 'shall remain'; for how shall the flesh of a beast slain and cooked sleep? What therefore is said, 'Why do you sleep, O Lord?' is said and understood by this kind of expression: 'Why do you cease,' that is, do not avenge. Of the forty days' fast of Moses the Scripture speaks thus: 'He did not eat bread and did not drink water.'

'The whole from a part,' that is, signifying by 'bread' all food and by 'water' all drink. 'Hew for yourself two tablets of stone like the first ones also,' 'were' being understood: whence our interpreters thought this word also should be added, since such an ellipsis is unusual in the Latin tongue. 'And Moses said to all the congregation of the sons of Israel, saying': it would have been complete even if it did not have 'saying.' 'And each one brought what his heart brought (adferebat cor eorum, plural).' It could have been said more customarily: 'and each one brought what his heart (eius, singular) brought.' 'And whomsoever their soul seemed good (to them) brought a portion to the Lord' — he did not say 'and as it seemed good to their soul.' 'And everyone with whom was found rams' skins dyed red,' whereas it would customarily be said:

'and all with whom rams' skins dyed red were found.' 'Everyone bringing a portion of silver and bronze brought (adtulerunt, plural) portions to the Lord.' It would more customarily be said 'everyone brought (singular)' than 'everyone brought (plural).' 'And with whom were found among them incorruptible timbers': 'among them' is added after the manner of the Scriptures; for without this the sentence would be complete. 'And every woman wise in mind to spin with her hands.' As if she could spin not with her hands; and 'wise to spin' is an elegant and unusual expression. Then: 'every woman brought (plural)' — after the manner of the above, the singular is concluded in the plural, since 'every woman brought (singular)' would more customarily be said. 'And all the women to whom it seemed good in their perception in wisdom spun goats' hair.'

It is to be noted that the Scripture often calls wisdom (in these arts) 'sophia.' 'And the compounds, and the oil of anointing, and the compound of incense': we are not to understand any compounds outside; but, since it had been said 'and the compounds,' by the copulative conjunction he did not add something else, but expounded what he had said, so that we might know which compounds — 'and the oil,' he says, 'of anointing, and the compound of incense.' He calls them 'compounds' because they are made up of many things. 'And every man and woman whose perception impelled them, that they should enter and do every work whatsoever the Lord commanded to be done by the hand of Moses — the sons of Israel brought a portion to the Lord.' Therefore 'every man and woman' is understood as 'the sons of Israel.'

The rest of the expressions are similar to the above. 'To make gold and silver and bronze': for what means 'to make out of gold and silver and bronze'; for they were not making gold, but out of gold. Such also is what he says a little after: 'and to work timbers,' that is, 'out of timbers.' 'To make all the works of the sanctuary, woven things and to weave various stuffs with scarlet and fine linen, to make every architectural work of variety.' Behold, even in woven things he calls it 'architectural' work; a wonder, unless for this reason, because they were being made for the tabernacle, which was like a building and was erected as it were a house. But as for what he says:

'the works of the holy one' — it is not clearly apparent whether 'of the holy priest,' since these things are said of his robe or robes; or 'of the holy God,' for whose worship these things were being made; or 'the works of the holy thing,' just as it used to be called 'the holy place' and 'the Holy of Holies.' 'The shoulder-pieces holding together from both its parts': he did not say 'from both their parts,' although he had said 'those shoulder-pieces' (plural), not 'the shoulder-piece' (singular), as he is wont to say 'shoulder-piece'; for he himself called it in the plural 'shoulder-pieces,' just as 'the robe' and 'the same robes.' 'And Eliab the son of Achisamach of the tribe of Dan, who was architect-craftsman to weave woven and stitched and multicoloured things of scarlet and fine linen.' In a new manner it is said 'to be architect-craftsman of woven things.' That too is to be understood as the whole from a part, which he says:

'to weave with scarlet and fine linen': for from these we understand also the rest, that is, purple and blue. 'And the sons of Israel did as the Lord commanded Moses, so they did': it would have been complete even if there were not added 'so they did.' 'And Moses did all things which the Lord commanded him, so he did': similarly, as it was said also of the sons of Israel. THIRD BOOK. EXPRESSIONS ON LEVITICUS. 'A man from among you, if he offers gifts to the Lord from the cattle, from the oxen and from the sheep you shall offer,' that is: 'if from the cattle you shall offer, from the oxen, from the sheep you shall offer.' Under the name of 'sheep' he included also the kind of goats, as he is wont to do in other places also. 'And you shall break them into fragments,' that is: 'by breaking you shall make them fragments.'

'And the sin which he sinned in it has become known to him.' Two modes of expression are here to be noted: both 'he sinned a sin' and, what he added, 'in it.' For in what except in it, that is, in the sin? 'But if a soul sins and hears the voice of adjuration and is himself a witness or has seen or has been privy, if he does not report it, then he shall bear his sin.' The 'and' (before 'shall bear') seems superfluous; for with it removed there follows in good order: 'he shall bear his sin.' 'But if a soul sins and hears the voice of adjuration and is himself a witness or has seen or has been privy, if he does not report it.' And it is put for 'that is'; for it could be said thus by the custom of our speech: 'but if a soul sins, that is, hears the voice of adjuration,' and so on.

'Or if he touches from man's uncleanness, from all his uncleanness by which if he touches he is defiled, and it is hidden from him, but after this he comes to know and offends' — when in right order it ought to have been said: 'and offends, but after this comes to know.' 'A soul, if it is hidden from him (eum) by forgetfulness and he sins unwilling.' He does not say 'if it is hidden from her (eam),' since he puts 'soul' for 'man,' as he does also in other places, where, having first said 'soul,' which is of the feminine gender, he afterwards brings in the masculine gender referring to 'man.' But here this expression is much more compressed, since both genders are placed continuously, so that it is said: 'A soul, if it is hidden from him.' This expression alarmed the Latin interpreters and they were unwilling to translate it, but put it thus:

'a soul, if any is hidden and sins unwilling,' although it is surely one thing if a soul be hidden, another if something be hidden from a soul; but this the Scripture says: 'if it be hidden from her,' not 'if she herself be hidden.' In the Greek, however, we find otherwise: 'a soul, if it be hidden from her (feminine) by forgetfulness'; but even he in what follows brought in the masculine, saying: 'the priest shall entreat for him, and it shall be forgiven him,' where it has 'autō' (masculine). Whence it appears that the writer feared a solecism, yet could not persevere in the feminine gender, overcome by the evidence of the following Scripture. 'This is the burnt-offering upon its burning upon the altar all night until morning, and the fire of the altar shall burn upon it': it could not have 'and,' and so be said thus:

'all night until morning the fire of the altar shall burn.' But this conjunction, when added, makes obscurity for those who are not accustomed to such expressions of the Scriptures. 'This is the law of the sacrifice, which the sons of Aaron, the priests, shall offer it before the Lord': nothing would be lacking if it did not have 'it.' 'It is the Holy of Holies (sancta sanctorum est).' So the Greek too has it; but it is a Greek expression, which some of ours, unwilling to translate, said: 'They are the Holy of Holies (sancta sanctorum sunt).' 'They shall slay the ram which is for the offence before the Lord.' The Latin interpreters added 'is' and said: 'which is for the offence.' This the Greek does not have. 'And if he sacrifices his gift as a vow or a freewill offering, on whatever day he offers the sacrifice, it shall be eaten on the morrow.'

For what means 'on the following day': whence others rendered it 'on the second day.' 'Boil the flesh in the court of the tabernacle of testimony in the holy place, and there you shall eat it, and the loaves which are in the basket of consecration, as it has been commanded to me, saying: Aaron and his sons shall eat them.' This expression some, unwilling to translate, said: 'as he commanded me, saying,' because this seems consistent, whereas that ('it has been commanded to me, saying') is a solecism in the custom of our speech. 'And at the door of the tabernacle of testimony you shall sit seven days, day and night.' For what means 'you shall dwell.' 'And Moses said to Aaron:'

come to the altar and offer that which is for your sin and your burnt-offering, and make atonement for yourself and your house; and make the gifts of the people and make atonement for them, as the Lord commanded Moses.' He did not say 'as the Lord commanded me,' but spoke thus as though there had been one Moses to whom the Lord gave command, and another, this one, who was speaking this to Aaron. 'And the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying: you shall not drink wine and strong drink,' and so on. Which speech of the Lord he thus concludes: 'all the statutes which the Lord spoke to them by the hand of Moses.' Although the Lord was speaking, he did not say 'which I spoke to them by the hand of Moses,' but used that expression which Moses himself used above.

'An everlasting statute throughout your generations, to distinguish between the midst of the clean and the defiled,' and so on. It is to be noted how he says 'everlasting,' which surely shall not be without end. Moses, speaking to Aaron, Eleazar, and Ithamar his sons, among other things said also this: 'From the sacrifices of the peace-offerings of the sons of Israel, the arm of the heave-offering and the little breast of the wave-offering they shall offer above the sacrifices of the fat, to set apart a setting-apart before the Lord. And it shall be for you and for your sons and for your daughters with you, an everlasting statute,' although this whole thing was going to have an end. When he was giving precept concerning the living creatures which are in the waters, which of them are clean or unclean, 'in the waters,' he says, 'and in the sea and in the torrents.'

But the Latin codices have 'in the sea' (singular), because it was too unusual to translate the plural number from the Greek and not say 'in the sea' but 'in the seas,' especially on account of the ambiguity, lest not 'seas' (maria) but 'males' (mares) should be understood, that is, males. For no less unusual is what nonetheless has been translated concerning 'bloods,' because the Latin language does not admit the plural number of 'blood' even in the nominative case itself. For although from that which is 'sea' (mare) no one says 'maribus,' yet 'seas' (maria) are spoken, whereas 'bloods' (sanguines) are not said — and yet it is written: 'Deliver me from bloods,' and: 'I will not gather their assemblies from bloods.' Therefore 'maribus' too could be so said, were it not, as I have said, that the ambiguity was avoided.

But 'torrents' the Scripture put in this place for 'rivers,' although 'torrents' are properly called winter streams, which dry up in summer and therefore cannot have fish. Whence some of our interpreters preferred to translate not 'torrents' but 'rivers.' That 'torrents' are put in the Scriptures for 'rivers,' that passage of the Psalm sufficiently shows, where it is read: 'and you shall give them to drink of the torrent of your pleasure.' For he did not wish anything such to be understood by the name of 'torrent' as would flow for a time and then dry up, since there follows and says: 'for with you is the fountain of life,' which surely is eternal and unfailing. 'But these you shall eat of the creeping flying things which walk upon four feet, which have legs above their feet':

he did not say 'their feet.' 'And you shall be holy, for I am holy,' 'am' being understood. Whence most of ours have translated: 'for I am holy.' 'And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying.' This is a most customary and very frequent expression in the Scriptures: 'he spoke, saying.' But that which follows is more rarely found and cramps the poverty of Latin speech. For the Greek has: 'kai ereis pros autous legōn,' which could be expressed in Latin as 'and you shall say to them, saying'; but it offends less if it be said 'and you shall speak to them, saying,' and it is more like the Greek, because he too did not say 'lege pros autous legōn,' but 'ereis pros autous legōn.'

'A woman, whosoever receives seed and bears a male, shall also be unclean seven days.' Most of ours were unwilling to translate it, but said thus: 'A woman, whosoever receives seed and bears a male, shall be unclean seven days.' That expression, therefore, since it is unusual even in Greek eloquence, could perhaps not be translated even into Greek; but since it did not irk the Greeks to translate it, why it should have irked the Latins I do not know. 'Thirty and three days she shall sit in her clean blood.' Likewise also of her who has borne a female it was said: 'she shall sit in her clean blood,' but with the same days doubled, that is, sixty-six days. 'She shall sit,' therefore, is said for 'she shall remain'; for it was not the case that for so many days she was not permitted to rise from her seat.

'If to any man there is made in the skin of his body a scar of a bright mark.' It is to be noted that the Scripture calls it a 'scar' not of a wound, but even of the mark of colour alone. 'And there is in the skin of his colour a touch of leprosy.' By 'touch' he means the spot itself — that the man himself is touched by leprosy. 'And the priest shall see him and defile him': for what means 'shall pronounce him defiled.' 'And the hair which is in the touch turns white': that is, 'turns into white.' 'And the priest shall purify him': for it is a sign — he shall pronounce him purified, just as 'shall defile,' which he said above: he shall pronounce him defiled. 'And the priest shall see him, and behold, the appearance is changed in the skin, and the priest shall defile him.' It has 'and' superfluous:

for with that conjunction removed, the sense is complete in this way: 'but if the appearance has been changed in the skin, after the priest saw him, to purify him, and he appears again to the priest, and the priest sees him, and behold, the appearance is changed in the skin, the priest shall defile him.' 'And if a touch of leprosy is in a man, he shall come to the priest; and the priest shall see, and behold, a white scar in the skin, and this has changed the hair to white, and from the sound part of the living flesh in the scar' — that is: it has changed the hair into a white colour in the scar; but it has changed it from the sound part of the living flesh, that is, because it does not have such a hair as is sound in the living flesh. When speaking of the leper, he said:

'and unclean, unclean he shall be called,' as though it were not enough to say once: 'he shall be called unclean.' Although some codices have it thus, in another Greek we find it said once: 'he shall be called unclean.' Likewise a little after he says: 'since he is unclean, unclean he shall be': which could not be expressed in Latin from the Greek just as it is placed. For the Greek says: 'akathartos ōn akathartos estai,' as if he said 'being unclean he shall be unclean'; but 'existing' (existens) is not what the Greek said by 'ōn,' but, if it could be said, 'essing' (essens) from that which is 'to be' (esse), not from that which is 'to exist' (existere). 'And a garment, if in it there is a touch of leprosy.' He could have said customarily thus: 'and in a garment, if there is a touch of leprosy.' 'Or in any vessel of skin, in whatsoever'

there is in it a touch.' It could suffice: 'in whatsoever there is a touch.' 'And behold, the touch has not changed its appearance,' that is, its colour, in which it is looked at — not the sight by which it itself looks; for by 'touch' he means the spot itself. 'And the priest, taking of the pint of oil, shall pour it over into the left hand of the priest.' He did not say 'into his own left hand,' although he certainly does it into his own. 'To a man, to any man whosoever there is a flux.' 'And a man, from whomsoever there goes out of him the intercourse of seed.' 'And everything over which whatever he sleeps over it.' 'And everything over which he sits over it shall be unclean.' 'And he shall send it away in the hand of a man prepared, into the desert,' that is: he shall send it away into the desert in the hand of a man prepared for this:

he was speaking of the scapegoat when he said this. It is to be noted, however, how the Scripture says 'in the hand.' 'Man, man of the sons of Israel,' that is: 'of the sons of Israel.' But this repetition seems to signify any man whatsoever, that is: 'this one or that one.' 'The nakedness of your father and the nakedness of your mother you shall not uncover.' By this expression he forbade intercourse with these persons. 'The nakedness of your father's brother you shall not uncover, and to his wife you shall not go in; for she is your kinswoman.' And 'for' is put for 'that is'; for by this he means the nakedness of his father's brother, that is, the nakedness of the uncle — the pudenda of the uncle's wife. 'And the land abhorred those who dwell (insident) upon it,' that is: 'have their seats,' which means 'dwell.'

'And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not finish reaping the harvest of your field.' This expression, which begins in the plural and ends in the singular number, most Latin translators were unwilling to render so; instead they said 'your (pl.) field' where it says 'your (sg.) field,' as though a Greek could not have spoken thus. But the manner of speech ought rather to have been noted than corrected. 'Whoever shall take his sister, from his father or from his mother, and shall see her nakedness and she shall see his nakedness, it is a reproach; they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he has uncovered the nakedness of his sister, they shall bear their sin.' Here 'sin' is put for 'the penalty of sin.'

'And you shall separate yourselves between the midst of clean beasts and between the midst of unclean beasts, and between the midst of clean and unclean birds.' 'You shall separate yourselves,' he said, 'between the midst of the clean and the unclean,' since the clean are separated from the unclean, or the unclean from the clean; this is an altogether novel manner of speech. For it is one thing to say 'you shall separate between the midst of clean beasts and between the midst of unclean beasts,' as Scripture very frequently is wont to speak; and it is another thing which he here says: 'you shall separate yourselves,' as though those who separate the one kind from the other separated themselves from both, as it were judging between the two. 'Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and you shall say to them:'

'They shall not be defiled in their souls among their people, except for a kinsman who is near to them.' He speaks of the mourning which is due to the souls of the dead; for men mourn because they have departed. 'And you shall not shave a baldness upon the dead, and upon their flesh they shall not cut cuttings.' The usual expression would have been 'they shall not cut their flesh with cuttings.' 'A woman that is a harlot and profane they shall not take, nor a woman cast out by her husband, for he is holy to the Lord his God.' He did not say 'for they are holy,' but as though speaking of one, though he had begun in the plural. Then it follows in the singular: 'he shall sanctify him; the gifts of the Lord your God this man shall offer;'

'he is holy, for I the Lord who sanctify them am holy'—again he closed in the plural. 'But if a priest shall possess a soul bought with money, this one shall eat of his bread.' He did not say 'this (fem.) shall eat,' though he had said 'soul,' which is of the feminine gender; but rather he looked to that which by 'soul' he wished to signify, that is, a man. 'And the daughter of a man that is a priest, if she be to a man of another nation,' that is, if she marry a man of another nation. 'And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: a calf or a sheep or a goat, when it is born, it shall be seven days under its mother.' It seems to have more, and according to the most usual expressions in the Scriptures, which most Latin translators were unwilling to render. 'And I shall be sanctified in the midst of the sons of Israel:'

which means 'I shall be held holy.' For the Lord is not other than holy even apart from the sons of Israel. In the same sense it is said also in the Lord's Prayer: 'Hallowed be thy name,' that is, let it be held holy by men. 'Speak to the sons of Israel, and you shall say to them: the solemn feasts of the Lord which you shall call sacred callings—these are my solemn feasts. Six days you shall do works.' Though he had said that he was speaking to many, afterward he speaks as though to one. 'And you shall number for yourselves from the day after the sabbath, on which he offered the sheaf of the wave offering, seven full weeks you shall number.' He did not say 'you (pl.) shall number,' though above he was speaking to many. 'And when the son of an Israelite woman had named the Name, he cursed'—though here he did not add 'of God.'

It is nevertheless manifest that the Name which he cursed must be understood as the Name of God. 'A man, a man, if he curse his God, shall bear his sin.' Behold, here it appears plainly enough that it is a manner of speech when it says 'a man, a man,' as though it said 'that man or the other,' that is, whatever man—not, as some have thought, that 'a man, a man' is said as though he were named in praise, as if it were said 'a man, but a man,' that is, not just any sort of man like a beast, but one who is truly a man. That this sense is not the true one, but that this is a manner of speech of the Scriptures, is plainly shown here, since it is said of him who is blamed, not of him who is praised.

When he was treating of the slaves whom it was lawful for the Israelites to have, 'and they shall be to you,' he says, 'in possession for ever'—though certainly they could not be either masters or slaves for ever, since they die. Therefore he said 'for ever' where there is no fixed limit of time as to how long they shall serve, as there is a limit set for those whom he commands to be released to their liberty in the remission. 'If you shall walk in my precepts and shall observe my commandments and do them, then I will also give you rain in its season.' The 'and' is superfluous to the custom of our speech, but was added after the manner of the Scriptures; for there followed: 'I will give you.' 'And if even so you shall not obey me, then I will add to chastise you seven times for your sins.' Here too the 'and' is superfluous;

for there followed: 'I will add to chastise you.' But as for his saying 'seven times,' it is to be taken for any number whatever. FOURTH BOOK. LOCUTIONS ON NUMBERS. 'And with you there shall be each one according to the tribe of each of the leaders. Of the sons of Simeon according to their kindreds, according to their peoples, according to the houses of their families, according to the number of their names, according to their heads, all the males from twenty years and upward, everyone that goes forth in strength, the review of them.' This expression, in that it does not say 'the sons of Simeon' or 'of the sons of Simeon,' but 'to the sons of Simeon' in the dative case—and it keeps this thereafter in the other tribes—was not rendered by the Latin translators whom we were able to inspect.

But in the tribe of Reuben alone, which was numbered first, this expression is not found; for it does not say 'to the sons of Reuben according to their kindreds,' and so forth, but it says 'and the sons of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel, were according to their kindreds,' and then in like manner as in the rest. 'And the sons of Israel did according to all that the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did.' 'The priests who were anointed, whose hands they consecrated to discharge the priesthood.' 'And they shall place upon it all its vessels, with which they minister in them.' 'And he shall restore to whom he has done wrong, to him.' Some, unwilling to render this expression, translated the words with corrected order, saying 'and he shall restore to him to whom he has done wrong.'

'A man or woman, whoever shall do from any of human sins.' It does not say 'whatsoever (fem.) she shall do'; but it is a manner of speech in which the masculine gender claims the pronoun, although the feminine is placed afterward—an expression which is not usual. 'Of men, men, if his wife have transgressed against him:' not only because he doubled the noun, so as to say 'of men, men,' but also because he added 'his,' the expression is to be noted. 'If the spirit of jealousy come upon him, but she be not defiled, then the man shall bring his wife to the priest:' the 'and' is superfluous, but it is an expression usual to the Scriptures. 'It shall be this water of reproof which is accursed.' This unusual expression the order of the words produced; for it might have been said in the usual way:

'it shall be this water of reproof which is accursed,' or 'it shall be this water of reproof which is accursed'—or in whatever other way it can be said by arranging the usual words. 'Be innocent from this water of reproof which is accursed.' In this expression not only does the order of the words sound unusual, but the case also is changed; for it would have been complete and usual: 'be innocent from this water of reproof which is accursed,' or 'from this water of reproof, which is accursed.' 'And she shall be swelled in the belly,' for 'she shall be swelled in the belly.' This expression is frequented also among Latin authors; but our translators, who were unwilling to render it, said 'and her belly shall swell.' 'A man or woman, whoever shall greatly vow a vow'—he did not say 'whatsoever (fem.).'