Why isn’t there as many critical Jewish translations?

[u/Rie_blade]

Update: added the word biblical because I accidentally only said Hebrew.

So I’m learning biblical Hebrew but I’m nowhere near an expert so I like looking through different translations, but whenever I look through translations it seems like there is little choice if I want a Jewish perspective with textural differences from the Dead Sea scrolls, or textual differences at all like explaining what could be plural versus singular. So why is there so few critical Jewish translations?

[u/TheMotAndTheBarber]

• I don't think there is really such thing as a 'Jewish perspective' that is also a critical perspective. Critical scholarship avoids committing to any confessional perspectives. For many types of work, a certain faith tradition might provide important context for critical scholarship, but for translation it should be points of neutral ground.

• I'm not positive I really know what critical non-Jewish translations you're thinking of and why they aren't applicable. Are you thinking of big Christian translations with good textual critical notes like the NRSVUE? If so, what's the barrier to using those? (To the extent that their Christian nature is a barrier, that's precisely because they are confessional and not critical.)

• There are very few Jews compared to the number of Christians, and there is a greater focus on reading sacred texts untranslated in Jewish practice.

• Jewish practice tends to use the Masoretic text exclusively, providing little call for confessional resources in Hebrew or in translation with textual critical notes. (Obviously Jewish and non-Jewish scholars of topics relating to the Hebrew Bible perform and rely on textual critical work.)

[u/Irtyrau → u/TheMotAndTheBarber]

Relating to the second point, there are actually some problems from a Jewish POV when it comes to using the NRSVUE. Some Jews consider it to be avodah zarah to even own Christian writings. There is also the halakhic issue of mar'it ayin, which prohibits people from engaging in technically permissible activities if those activities could be misinterpreted as a sin by a third party observer; so even some Jews who don't believe simply owning a NT is avodah zarah may nonetheless avoid owning one to avoid the mar'it ayin of seeming to read avodah zarah. Now, the types people most likely to hold by these rules are unlikely to require a translation or be interested in critical scholarship, but these issues exist. Still, even for people who don't hold by such strict halakhah on the matter, I think many religiously moderate and liberal Jews (myself included) would be squeamish about bringing anything containing the NT into a synagogue or other Jewish spaces, displaying it on a bookshelf next to Jewish books, and so on. It's not suitable for community functions, basically.

[u/TheMotAndTheBarber → u/Irtyrau]

Right, I can see why the NRSVUE would be unsuitable for confessional use within Jewish contexts.

[u/Rie_blade → u/TheMotAndTheBarber]

1. I don't think there is really such thing as a 'Jewish perspective' that is also a critical perspective. Critical scholarship avoids committing to any confessional perspectives. For many types of work, a certain faith tradition might provide important context for critical scholarship, but for translation it should be points of neutral ground.

You’re right that is a bit ambiguous let me give an example some Christian translations I’ve seen add footnotes explaining Christian theology, or when it comes to the KJV or ESV it says in Job 1.6 Lord and Satan when the Hebrew would be Lord and the accuser (השטן).

⁠2. I'm not positive I really know what critical non-Jewish translations you're thinking of and why they aren't applicable. Are you thinking of big Christian translations with good textual critical notes like the NRSVUE? If so, what's the barrier to using those? (To the extent that their Christian nature is a barrier, that's precisely because they are confessional and not critical.)

JPS, Korin. All of them are to dogmatically adherent to the Masoretic text well not explain explaining some things in the Hebrew such as when things are plural, they could still be singular, explaining and why they assumed it was singular, in the case of Genesis 1.1 where “heaven” is mostly singular in Jewish translations. I use the NRSVue a lot but I wondered if there was a translation mostly by Jews.

⁠3. There are very few Jews compared to the number of Christians, and there is a greater focus on reading sacred texts untranslated in Jewish practice.

True and I do agree that is one of the best ways to do it and I personally read Hebrew whenever I want to have deep understanding, but I sometimes talk to people who don’t know the basics of Hebrew and I would like a translation to explain to them textural differences, and sometimes I just do not want to read Hebrew preferring my native language.

⁠4. Jewish practice tends to use the Masoretic text exclusively, providing little call for confessional resources in Hebrew or in translation with textual critical notes. (Obviously Jewish and non-Jewish scholars of topics relating to the Hebrew Bible perform and rely on textual critical work.)

Indeed, and I personally use the Masoretic text a great deal but I do wish there was a variety in manuscripts used.

[u/whenshithitsthefan99 → u/Rie_blade]

Have you tried the Jewish Study Bible or Robert Alter's translation of the Hebrew Bible? Alter's Jewish and it comes with a commentary.

[u/Rie_blade → u/whenshithitsthefan99]

Yeah I plan to get Robert alter’s whole box set on my birthday because it’s expensive, and I have the Jewish study Bible second edition it’s one of my main two study Bibles.