Repozitórium index

The Book of Habakkuk is well-known for using a very sophisticated language in terms of semantics, poetics, or rhetorical structure, causing tremendous difficulties to later interpreters, both ancient and modern. For this reason, from a diachronic perspective, textual deviations from the canonical Massoretic tradition could be mere relics of the perplexity of confused translators or scribes. This study argues, however, that there are cases where the independent, divergent textual traditions coalesce into a reading that could be considered a historically more reliable variant than the reading survived within the Massoretic Text. This appears to be the case with בגוים in Hab 1:5 and היין in Hab 2:5, for which three independent traditions presuppose a common pre-Massoretic ancient alternative reading.

Ebben a tanulmányban két olyan vitatott szövegrészt vizsgálok meg Habakuk könyvéből (Habakuk 1,5 és 2,5), ahol a Masszoréta Szövegnél korábbi verziók egy, a masszoréta hagyománynál korábbi szövegvariánsba engednek betekintést. Az elemzésben Habakuk könyvének két legrégebbi tanúját hívom segítségül, a Septuagintát és a qumráni Habakuk pešert (illetve elemzem a hasonló irányba mutató szír Pesittát is). Az elemzésre kerülő szövegrészek esetében nagy valószínűséggel nem kései, hanem korai olvasatokról kell beszélnünk.

This article argues that Isa 29,15-24 is composed of five coherent segments. The early Isaianic word, 29,15+21, was reinterpreted in a new way by an exilic author in 29,16-17+20. The presupposed blindness of Yhwh serving as a motivation for an ungodly life by those addressed in 29,15, is reconsidered as the ideology of desperate people who deem the blindness of Yhwh explains the present desolate condition of Jerusalem. The former injustice in Isaiah's society (29,21) is reinterpreted as the injustice of the foreign tyrant against the people of Yhwh. Isa 29,18+24 (the blindness of the people) and 29,19+23d-e (the oppressed Yhwh-fearing people) elaborate on the same theme in a larger context and presuppose a similar situation and author as implied by 29,16-17+21, probably to be identified with Deutero-Isaiah.