13. And it was sa, when Elijah 13. And it was when Elijah heard
heard it, that he wrapped his face in this, he hid his face in his mantle, his mantle, aud went out, and stood and he went out and he stood at the in the entering in of the cave : and, door of the cave ; aud, lo ! with him behold, (^er£ came a voice unto him, was a voice, saying. What doest and said, What doest thou here, thou here, O Elijah ? etc. Elijah !
IsA. XXXIII.
29. For the Lord is our judge, the 99. For the Lord is our judge, who
Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is delivered us with his power from
our king; he will save us. Mizraim ; the Lord is our teacher,
for he has given us the doctrine of
the Tornh from Sinai; the Lord is our king: he will deliver us,
and give us righteous restitution from the army of Gog.
Jek. X.
11. Thus shall ye say unto them, 11. This is the copy of the letter
The gods that have not made the which Jeremiah the prophet sent to
heavens and the earth, even they the remaining ancient ones of the
shall perish from the earth, aud from captivity in Babel : " And if the na-
under these heavens. tions among whom you are will say
unto you, Pray to our Errors, O
house of Israel, then you shall answer thus, and speak in this wise :
The Errors unto which you pray are Errors which are of no use :
thev cannot rain from Leaven ; they cannot cause fruit to grow
froiii the earth. They and their worshippers will perish from the
earth, and will be destroyed from under these heavens.
Mic. VI.
4. For I brought thee up out of 4. For I have taken thee out from
the land of Egypt, and redeemed the land of Mizraim, and have re- thee out of the house of servants; leased thee from the house of thy and I sent before thee Mosea, Aaron, bondage : and have sent before thee aud Miriam. three prophets : Moses, to teach thee
the tradition of the ordinances ; Aaron, to atone for the people ; and Miriam, to teach the women.
3. Literature. — For the editions, translations, and old- er literature, see Fiirst, Bilil. .lud. ii, 106 sq. ; Wolf, Bihl. //e6r. ii, 1166; Le Long(ed. Masch), II, i,39 sq. ; Rosen- mliller, Handbuch,\i\, 9 sq.; Frankel.Zw dem Targum der Propheteti (Breslau, 1872) ; La^arde, Pruphetce Chalduice. Efide Codicis Reuchliniani (Lips. 1872 sq.) ; Bacher, Kri- tische Untersuchungen zum Proj)heteiitarguin,in the Zeit-
TARGUM
110
TARGUM
schrift (]. dcutscJi, morfjenl. Gescllschiift. 1874, xxviii, 1 sq. ; 1875, xxix, 157 sq., oil) sq. See Jonathan ben-
UZZIKL.
IV. The Tarfjiim of Pseudo- Jonathan and Jerushalmi on the Pentateuch. — The greater simplicity which char- acterized the older Targiims soon ceased to satisfy the progressively degenerating taste of the Jews, especial- ly alter the Talmud began to assume a written form. Hence Targums marked W greater laxity soon began to be written which embraced more the opinions pecul- iar to the age, and furnished the text with richer tra- ditional addenda. Of these latitudinarian Targums we possess two on the Pentateuch — the one known by the name of Pseudo -Jonathan, inasmuch as writers of a later period ascribe it to the author of the Targum on the Prophets; and the commonly so-called Targum Hi- erosol_vmitanum, or Jerushalmi.
1. Pseudo - Jonathan. — This paraphrase is falsely as- cribed to Jonathan ben-Uzziel. It extends from the first verse of Genesis to the last of Deuteronomy. The way in which it came to be regardeil as his is supposed to have been the mistake of a copyist, who made out of "• r, i. e. Targum Jerushalmi — "iTDT^ P, Targum Jona- than. Proof is not needed at the present day to show that the Jonathan of the prophets is not the Jonathan of the Pentateuch, for he could have little to do with a Targum which speaks of Constantinople (Numb, xxiv, 19, 24), describes very plainly the breaking -up of the West-Roman empire (ver. 19-24), mentions the Turks (Gen. X, 2), and even Mohammed's two wives, Chadija and Fatima (xxi, 21), and which not only exhibits the fullest acquaintance with the edited bod}' of the Baby- lonian Talmud, by quoting entire passages from it, but adopts its jieculiar phraseology: not to mention the complete disparity between the style, language, and general manner of the Jonathanic Targum on the Prophets, and those of this one on the Pentateuch, strikingly palpable at first sight. This was recognised by early investigators (Morinus, Pfeiffer, Walton, etc.), who soon overthrew the old belief in Jonathan ben- Uzziel's authorship, as upheld by Menahem Rekanati, Asariah de Rossi, Gedaljah, Galatin, Fagius, etc. The work of the Pseudo -Jonathan is not a version. It is rather a paraphrase, though by no means exclusively so. Neither is it a Ilaggadic commentar}'. Version and paraphrase are interwoven throughout, the author sel- dom confining himself to simple explanation, but pro- ceeding to large Midrashim. llalachah and Haggadah are riclilv imbedded in the work, the latter especially. His legends are rich and copious. His Haggadah is not historical; it is ethical, religious, metaphysical, lyrical, and parabolic. It has been well observed that he is only the interpreter of the ideas prevailing in his time — the narrator of traditions, religious and national, not their inventor, because most of them are found in preceding literature, or, as Zunz states it, " almost all his expla- nations and embellishments coinciding with the Hag- gadah we find occurring in the other Haggadic writ- ings; the few which are peculiar to him he has not devised, any more than Jonathan has devised his inter- pretation of the prophets. In both the culture of the age and the potency of traditional ideas are manifest" [Gottesd. Fo?-/?aV/e, p. 72). To these embellishments be- longs the manner in which events and characters are dressed out hyperbolically in Jonathan's ]\Iidrashim ; not only the 13iblical heroes, as was natural, but even the enemies of the Jewish nation. Thus Og carries on his head a piece of rock sufficient to bury all the camp of Israel beneath its weight (Numb, xxi, 35). A moun- tain possessed of divine virtues is suspended in the air over the children of Israel (Exod. xix, 17), etc. Many examples are given by Zunz (op. cit. p. 72, note b) to show, against Winer and Petermann, that all these sto- ries were not invented by Pseudo- Jonathan, but bor- rowed from traditional usage. The ethical Haggadah