Aramaic
I. The first time Aramaic is used in the Bible is in Genesis 31:47, where Laban names a stone monument in Aramaic, while James gives it a Hebrew name. It is difficult to ascertain exactly how ancient Aramaic is. Albright considers it established that this language originated from one of the West Semitic dialects spoken in northwestern Mesopotamia at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. Obviously, traces of this dialect are visible in the messages from the archive → . According to Albright, this dialect was spoken by the Jewish patriarchs before they moved to Palestine. There they adopted the local Canaanite dialect. But such a statement raises some doubts. One of the oldest inscriptions in Aramaic, the Kilammu inscription, presumably dates back to the 2nd half of the 9th century BC. It was found in Zinjirli along with later inscriptions, probably in the 8th century BC. Science also has the Zakir inscription dating back to the beginning of the 8th century BC. (→ , III). The ancient Aramaic language of this inscription still has much in common with Canaanite. The influence of the Canaanite as well as the Akkadian languages is especially strong in the Kilammu inscription, so that some scholars refuse to admit that this text was written in Aramaic.
II. The Aramaic language, previously (based on Dan 2:4) erroneously considered Chaldean, became widespread (2 Kings 18:26) and eventually, having supplanted Hebrew, became colloquial, turning by the time of Jesus into the language of the Jewish people. Written Hebrew, in which most of the OT was written, was no longer used as a spoken language. Like the Assyrians and Babylonians - Akkadian, and later in the Roman Empire - Greek, so in the Persian kingdom - Aramaic became the language of official documents and interethnic communication (see also the Book of Ezra). The Jews of the dispersion, who lived in Egypt, also spoke Aramaic. This is found in Jewish papyrus documents dating back to the 5th and 4th centuries BC, found at Elephantine (in Upper Egypt). In the period after the Babylonian captivity, Hebrew could only be heard in the synagogues during the reading of the Scriptures. At the same time, the translator presented the read text in a free translation into Aramaic. Since such a presentation was too free, then later there was a need for a written translation. In Aramaic it was called → (= "translation"). Over time, Aramaic was replaced by Arabic.
III. Aramaic, along with Canaanite and Hebrew, belongs to the Northwestern Semitic languages, and is in turn subdivided into Western and Eastern Aramaic. Written records in Western Aramaic include:
1)
Ancient Aramaic inscriptions: inscriptions from Zinjirli together with Kilammu and Zakir inscriptions, Nabataean inscriptions (1st century BC - 1st century A.D.), inscriptions from Palmyra (1st century BC - 3rd century A.D.), Sinai inscriptions (I -IV centuries A.D.);
2)
Biblical Aramaic: two words in Gen 31:47 (see I); Jer 10:11; Dan 2:4 - Dan 7:28; Ezr 4:8 - Ezr 6:18; Ezra 7:12-26;
3)
Aramaic of Jewish papyri and other documents from Egypt (5th and 4th centuries BC);
4)
The Aramaic language of the Jewish Targums (translations), as well as the Jerusalem and Palestinian Talmuds (II-V centuries AD);
5)
Samaritan - the language of the translation of the Samaritan Pentateuch (used as a purely lit. until the Middle Ages, i.e. even after there were no native speakers of this language;
6)
Christian-Palestinian Aramaic language of the Melkite Christians who lived in Palestine (V-VIII centuries AD);
7)
New Aramaic, which is still spoken today in a small region in the mountains of Anti-Lebanon.
IV. Eastern Aramaic includes:
1)
Jewish-Aramaic Babylonian Talmud (4th-6th centuries A.D.);
2)
Mandaean - the language of the pagan Gnostics from the Mandaean sect (from the 4th century AD);
3)
Syriac - written language Syrian Church in northern Syria and in Mesopotamia in the III-XIV centuries. It originated from the dialect of Edessa, the oldest inscriptions on which date back to the 1st century A.D. The name "Syriac" is explained by the fact that Christians who spoke Eastern Aramaic called themselves suryaye. They borrowed this word from Greek, where suroy- short for Assurian. Semitic name for this people aramaye, Akkadian arime, they used only in the meaning of "pagans";
4)
New Aramaic dialects in Mesopotamia, now spoken in Mosul and Tur-Abdin, and also in Armenia, where New Syriac from Urmia also became a written language.
While surfing the Internet, I came across one interesting note: "The literal translation of the Our Father in Aramaic." I was interested in the name itself and, having opened the link, I began to look for this prayer. To my surprise, I found something that I was not looking for, something that, in my opinion, went beyond the truth.
The translation of the Lord's Prayer from Aramaic into Russian was as follows:
"Oh Breathing Life,
Your name shines everywhere!
Free up space
Your "I can" now!
Sprout through us bread and
Everything comes from you
Vision, Power and Song
From meeting to meeting!
I could not believe my eyes, my spirit resisted reading this, I will not be ashamed of expressions - nonsense that the author passed off as a literal translation of a prayer from Aramaic into Russian. I looked at various links on the Internet and was amazed at how many links say the same thing. People ignorantly copying the text, share it with others, passing it off as some kind of secret truth. Reading this "translation", for some reason, I immediately remembered the Gnostics (heretical sect of the 1st-2nd centuries AD) who propagated some secret teaching of Christ, which gives enlightenment to man and understanding of all things and pantheism (the heresy of the 4th century AD, exists to this day).
One of the authors who posted this nonsense on the Internet claimed that it was the Aramaic language that was the dominant and primary version of the written text of the New Testament. Peshitta (Syriac translation of the Bible, Aramaic dialect), was based on a translation of the Aramaic Targum, which means that the Greek version of the New Testament was later than the Peshita, and was only a translation from Aramaic, the same language that was native to Jesus Christ and the apostles. In other words, the Greek version is not primary. Assuring readers, the author shares a false "translation from the original language" into Russian.
Before moving on to the direct separation of the "flies from the cutlets", let me recall a little from the Christian story:
There are several ancient translations of the Holy Scripture into various languages: Septuagint - Greek Translation Old Testament, Targums is a common name for translations of the Old Testament into Aramaic, Vulgate is a translation of the Bible into Latin, and Peshita is one of the translations of the Bible into Syriac (Edessa dialect of Aramaic). The author's hypothesis, according to which the Peshitta was based on a translation of the Aramaic Targum, does not stand up to criticism and does not pass the support of theologians, scientists, history. However, there are elements of Targum influence in the text of the Syriac Old Testament (especially in the Pentateuch of Moses and Chronicles). But the style and level of Peshitta translation of the Old Testament books varies quite a lot in different parts of Scripture. Some parts of it may have been translated by the Syrian-speaking Jews before the rise of the Christian Church, while others may have been reworked by the first baptized Jews.
Speaking of the Aramaic language, it should be noted that in the Hellenistic era and up to the Arab conquest, he successfully competed with Greek, leaving behind all the other Semitic languages the role of local dialects. But since the 2nd century, the ancient Aramaic language, which was spoken by the entire Middle East, including Egypt, has undergone changes and strong modifications under the influence of various cultures and after the conquest of the Arabs (7th century AD).
Historically, it should be noted that the books of the Old Testament were translated into Syriac in the last quarter of the 2nd century CE. e., the New Testament books were translated by the beginning of the 5th century AD. and, apparently, were grouped and reworked by the Bishop of Edessa, Rabbula. That is, by the 5th century AD, the Peshita as such had already been formed (The very name "Peshitta", in relation to the standard (generally accepted) Syriac Bible, appeared only in the 9th century AD).
But refuting historicity, there are still people who claim that all the teachings of Christ and the apostles were taught only in Aramaic, and that it, being the language of the original text, preceded the text of Scripture in the Koine Greek dialect. It is also surprising that this position is mainly taken by the separating views of Nestorianism. (the heresy of the 4th century dividing Christ into common man before baptism and the Son of God after that, i.e. rejecting one single person and hypostasis).
When studying biblical studies, we remember that there is a synoptic problem (similarity and differences in the Gospels). And today there is no firm conviction as to why it exists, there are only various hypotheses, each of which has its pros and cons. Today, one of the most realistic hypotheses is that Matthew and Luke, writing the gospel, used a certain source “Q”, from the German “Quelle” (source), whether this source was part of the sayings of Jesus Christ in Aramaic or not, It is not known, although some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels are translations from the Aramaic language, but be that as it may, it is believed that the text of the Gospel in its current form was compiled precisely in Greek, like other texts of the New Testament. Besides, Greek language books of the New Testament, accepted by the fathers of the Church as the language of the original texts, without any discussion. There is plenty of other evidence that, after all, it was Koine (dialect of Greek) and was the original text of the New Testament. I would also like to note that to this day not a single manuscript of fragments of the books of the New Testament in Aramaic has been found, the text of which would be dated earlier than the Koine Greek of the New Testament.
Recalling a little history, we understand that no “original text in Aramaic” has been found (according to my convictions, it does not exist, because God allowed the Scripture to form in the form in which we see Him, have, and with the language found in ancient manuscripts). Now about the prayer "Our Father" and the author of this "translation". To do this, let's turn our attention again to the "literal translation from Aramaic" presented to us:
"Oh Breathing Life,
Your name shines everywhere!
Free up space
To plant Your presence!
Imagine in your imagination
Your "I can" now!
Clothe Your desire in every light and form!
Sprout through us bread and
Insight for every moment!
Untie the knots of failure that bind us
As we free the rope ropes
by which we restrain the misdeeds of others!
Help us not to forget our Source.
But free us from the immaturity of not being in the Present!
Everything comes from you
Vision, Power and Song
From meeting to meeting!
Amen. May our next actions grow from here.”
To begin with, it should be noted that the prayer "Our Father" was recorded on ancient Greek, and this translation is only a kind of "curved reconstruction of the meaning" with a deliberate misleading of the reader. We know that there are fragments, as part of the sayings of Christ, translated from Aramaic, one of such fragments is the prayer of Christ on the cross of Golgotha, but among all the fragments we know, there is not a single mention of the “prayer of our Father” in Aramaic.
In addition, in ancient Aramaic, as well as in Hebrew and Ancient Greek, the appeal to God always went in a bunch of personal pronouns male but not as feminine or average. Is it possible to imagine that a patriarchal culture, where the leading and dominant role in the family, the state and politics belonged to a man, suddenly allows turning to God as to some unknown force female without personality? Of course not! Not one Jew of a monotheistic religion, brought up in a patriarchal culture, knowledgeable of books The law will never allow itself to turn to God the Creator, as the author of this “translation” of the Our Father prayer offers us.
We say and understand that Scripture is interpreted by Scripture alone. Jesus, in his teaching, repeatedly drew the attention of his disciples to the Father, from whom he descended and to whom he is going again. He spoke about the Father's love in deeds, parables, in the history of the people, in Scripture. He emphasized His oneness with the Father, but the Person of the Father, as presiding over the Trinity. He never taught that the Father can be addressed as some unknown power. Russian word"Father (parent)", in Aramaic, as well as in Hebrew, sounds like "Aba (Abba)", in Greek "Pater". Addressing God the Father as "Our Father" in Hebrew sounds like "Avinu", in Aramaic "Avvun". But it is surprising that the author of the so-called “translation” of the Our Father prayer never used the word Father, and it is precisely this word that is the main and central one in this prayer. On the contrary, I believe that the word "father" was deliberately omitted to show the false "greatness" of a literal prayer devoid of any meaning and power of the Spirit, passing it off as a secret truth! Based on the teachings of Christ, we see how this “translation” destroys the essence of God the Father as a Person, passing him off as some kind of power, thereby undermining relations within the Trinity and with people. Presented to the masses for review, the so-called "translation" of the Lord's Prayer is nothing more than a heresy, a fusion of Gnosticism and pantheism, a heresy that the Church has struggled with for centuries. You can currently see this fusion in movements such as the New Age. New Age”), which with all its might declares the syncretism of religions, the destruction of true Christianity, and the rejection of the Christian idea of a personal Creator God, opposing to it the idea of an impersonal deity.
Now, as for the author himself who made this “translation” and threw it into the world: The author of this “translation” is Doctor of Religion and Somatic (Bodily-Oriented) Psychology Saadi Neil Douglas-Klotz (Murshid Saadi Shakur Chishti). His main interests lie in the area of combining ancient meditation techniques with modern psychology and body science. He is a specialist in the field of Middle Eastern mysticism, the author of several books devoted to the study of the so-called authentic message contained in the primary sources of world religions - "Prayers of the Cosmos: Meditation on the words of Jesus, spoken in Aramaic" (by the way, it is likely that this "translation" presented is an excerpt from the same book), "Wisdom of the Deserts", "The Hidden Gospel", " Sufi book Life."
Murshid Saadi (Neil Douglas-Klotz) is one of the senior teachers of the Sufi order Ruhaniat (Sufi Ruhaniat International), follows the so-called "Sufi path" for about 30 years. In Russia he is known as one of the founders of the World Peace Dance Network. Using the Sufi Technique - Dhikr (practice of remembering one's true nature, using meditation and chanting) and dancing with the use of mantras of various religious and national traditions, he proposes "to establish a real contact of a person with himself, both with his depths and with his heights ...".
God is a Just Judge, He will judge everyone who rejects Christ as a Savior and personal Lord. God will judge anyone who leads a person astray by presenting a lie as the truth. But from us, as from Christians following the Lord, no one removed the responsibility for our salvation, regardless of who or what we met on our way. Satan has not stopped walking around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour!
Studying the “literal translation of the Lord's Prayer” offered for everyone to see, I also noticed that it is distributed mainly not on Christian resources, but on various heretics that have their own affiliation to the New Age or share views with it - sites on mysticism , esotericism, meditation, parapsychology, talking about some secret teachings and truth. Someone distributes these texts, copying them on the pages of their websites and blogs, someone through statements in the statuses of social networks. It is surprising that Christians, reading these texts, without delving into the very essence of what they read, themselves continue to spread this nonsense on the Internet, passing it off as the truth, while others, echoing them, send it further. A spreading infection settles not only on the Internet, but also in the minds of many people. Some Christians, reading the text, manage to leave flattering comments on it like: “It's cool”, “Amen. Truly so”, “Thank you for the literal translation, now I will know.” What to know? Why shout Amen? What's cool? They read and shout, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God! It's a shame to eat everything, not understanding what they feed you! (sorry for being blunt).
Now, knowing a little about the history of translations of Scripture and the author of this “translation” of the Lord’s Prayer, I think it’s not difficult to understand that the so-called “literal translation of the Our Father” distributed on the Internet has nothing to do with the real prayer of Christ, but is only heresy, deliberately aimed at undermining Christian doctrine and destruction of Christianity as a whole!
Due to the fact that the ancient Aramaic language is considered dead (Aramaic (New Aramaic dialect) is only spoken in Syria), an approximate translation of the prayer "Our Father" on it will look like this:
“Avvun dbishmaya! nitkaddah shimmuh; aunt boy; neve sovyanukh eychana dbishmaya ab para; Ha la lahma dsunkanan yumana; Vushyuh lan hobain, eychana dap akhnan shuklan hayavin; vula taalan lnisyuna, ella pasan min bishya. Mudtul diluh chai malchuta, uheila, utishbukhta l’alam allmin. Amine". (Our Father who art in heaven! your name; let your kingdom come; may Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven; give us our daily bread this day; and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.)
Summing up what has been said, I would like to call everyone to comprehend everything we read. Dear friends, on the Internet, a lot of things are spreading, both good and bad, watch what you read and spread. Do not distribute the so-called "literal translation of the Lord's Prayer" on the net, or in any other way, do not pass it off as a lost truth, it has neither depth nor the power of the Spirit! After all, there are those who are weak, who do not understand, who read everything in a row and swallow everything they read, who cannot separate the wheat from the tares, those who will be tempted, who will believe, and as a result may fall away, because. allow doubts to settle in your heart. And the Lord will ask us for it.
Everything that we need, Christ left in the Scripture, transmitted through the patriarchs, prophets, apostles! Do not mislead weak sheep, do not think that there is some hidden meaning where there is none. When analyzing sermons, references, texts, statements of people, check them with Scripture, is it exactly the way it is presented? Remember at least fragments of the New Testament: “These people were more prudent than Thessalonica: they received the word with all diligence, daily examining the Scriptures, whether this is exactly so” (Acts 17:11), “Pay attention to yourself and to the doctrine; do this constantly: for by doing this you will save yourself and those who hear you” (1 Tim. 4:16).
Knowing the truth, let us hold fast to the Scriptures, neither deviating to the right nor to the left!
Literal translation of the Our Father prayer from Aramaic, read and feel the difference:
Oh Breathing Life,
Your name shines everywhere!
Free up space
To plant Your presence!
Imagine in your imagination
Your "I can" now!
Clothe Your desire in every light and form!
Sprout through us bread and
Insight for every moment!
Untie the knots of failure that bind us
As we free the rope ropes
by which we restrain the misdeeds of others!
Help us not to forget our Source.
But free us from the immaturity of not being in the Present!
Everything comes from you
Vision, Power and Song
From meeting to meeting!
Amen. May our next actions grow from here.
****
When and why did the mention of the evil one (Satan) appear in the prayer "Our Father"?
In ancient Church Slavonic there is no evil: "... and do not lead us into attack, deliver us from enmity." Who added "onion" to the main prayer of Jesus Christ?
The Lord's Prayer, known to every Christian since childhood, is a concentrated presentation of the entire Christian doctrine. At the same time, it is one of the most perfect literary works ever recorded in writing.
This is the accepted view of the short Lord's Prayer that Jesus taught His disciples.
How is this possible? After all, many volumes were needed for a complete presentation of religious teachings in other religions. And Jesus didn't even ask His disciples to write down her every word.
Just during the Sermon on the Mount He said (Matthew 6:9:13):
"Pray like this:
Our Father, who art in heaven!
And leave us our debts,
like we leave our debtor.
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one.”
But this is not the only way to translate the Lord's Prayer into Russian. In the edition of the Gospel of 1892 that the author has, there is a slightly different version:
"Our Father, who art in heaven!
hallowed be thy name; let your kingdom come;
may Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven;
give us our daily bread for this day;
and forgive us our debts;
our debtors;
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one;
In the modern, canonical edition of the Bible (with parallel places), we find almost the same version of the translation of the Prayer:
"Our Father who art in heaven!
hallowed be thy name; Let your kingdom come;
may Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven;
give us our daily bread this day;
and forgive us our debts;
just as we forgive our debtors;
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from the evil one;
In the Old Slavonic translation, Prayer (if you write it modern alphabet) sounds closer to the first option:
"Our Father, who art in heaven!
May your name be hallowed! Let your kingdom come;
May Your will be done as in heaven and on earth.
Give us our daily bread today.
And leave us our debts,
as if we leave our debtor.
And do not lead us into misfortune,
but deliver us from the evil one.”
These translations use different words to refer to the same concepts. “Forgive us” and “leave us”, “attack” and “temptation”, “who art in heaven” and “who is in heaven” mean the same thing.
There is no distortion of the meaning and spirit of the words given by Christ to His disciples in any of these options. But comparing them, one can come to the important conclusion that the literal transmission of the Words of Jesus is not only impossible, but not mandatory.
IN English translations The gospels can be found in several different versions, but all of them can be considered authentic, because in them the meaning of the Prayer and its spirit are adequately conveyed.
The Lord's Prayer became widespread immediately after the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus. This can be seen at least from the fact that it was found in such remote points as the city of Pompeii (that is, it was there before Pompeii was destroyed by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 A.D.)
At the same time, the original text of the Lord's Prayer has not come down to us in its original form.
In translations into Russian, the Lord's Prayer sounds the same in the Gospels of Matthew (6:9-13) and Luke (11:2-4). We find the same text in the Gospels KJV (King James Version) in English.
If we take the Greek source, we will be surprised to find that the familiar words “who are in heaven”, “Thy will be done as in heaven and on earth” and “deliver us from the evil one” are absent in the Gospel of Luke.
There are many versions explaining the reasons for the disappearance of these words in the Gospel of Luke and their appearance in translations, and later in modern Greek editions of the Gospel. We will not dwell on this, for what matters to us is not the letter, but the spirit of the great Prayer.
Jesus did not command us to pray by memorizing His words literally. He simply said "Pray like this:" that is, "pray like this."
Konstantin Glinka
"Our Father" in Aramaic
Today in the morning I dreamed that I was walking with someone unfamiliar through the rocky desert and looking into the sun-drenched sky. Suddenly I noticed that either a carved gilded casket or a book in the same binding was rapidly approaching us.
I didn’t have time to tell my friend that it’s just like objects falling from the sky in the desert, and it’s good that it’s not on my head, when I realized that the object was flying straight at me. A second later, he crashed to my right, where my friend should have been. I was so stunned that I woke up before I looked in the direction of the unfortunate comrade.
The morning began unusually: on the Internet I came across “Our Father” in the language of Jesus. The translation from Aramaic shocked me so much that I was late for work, checking if it was fake. ".
That is, as far as I understand, the Greek primary source used to be the dominant authority in theological disputes, but absurdities were noticed in it that could arise when translated from the original language. In other words, the Greek version is not primary.
The Aramaic version of the Gospel ("Peshitta", in the Edessa dialect of Aramaic) exists, but it is a translation from Greek.
True, as it turned out, not complete. And not only in the sense of the absence of some parts: there are places in it that have been preserved in more ancient form because they were already written in Aramaic.
This also applies to the famous main prayer of Christians "Our Father".
*******
And if you translate literally:
Abwoon d "bwashmaya
Nethqadash shmakh
Teytey malkuthakh
Nehwey tzevyanach aykanna d "bwashmaya aph b" arha.
Hawvlah lachma d "sunqanan yaomana
Wela tahlan l "nesyuna ela patzan min bisha.
Metol dilakhie malkutha wahayla wateshbukhta l "ahlam almin.
Ameyn.
Abwoon d "bwashmaya (Official translation: Our Father!)
Literal: Abwoon translates as Divine parent (fruitful emanation of light). d "bwashmaya - the sky; the root shm - light, flame, the divine word that arises in space, the ending aya - indicates that this radiance occurs everywhere, at any point in space
Nethqadash shmakh (Official translation: Hallowed be thy name)
Literal: Nethqadash translates as purification or an object for sweeping rubbish (clear a place for something). Shmakh - spreading (Shm - fire) and letting go of inner fuss, finding silence. The literal translation is the cleansing of the space for the Name.
Teytey malkuthakh (Official translation: Thy Kingdom come)
Literal: Tey is translated as come, but the double repetition means mutual desire (sometimes - a marriage bed). Malkuthakh is traditionally translated as a kingdom, symbolically a fruitful hand, gardens of the earth; wisdom, purification of the ideal, making it personal for oneself; come home; Yin (creative) hypostasis of fire.
Nehwey tzevyanach aykanna d "bwashmaya aph b" arha. (Official translation: Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven)
Literal: Tzevyanach translates as will, but not strength, but the desire of the heart. One of the translations is naturalness, origin, the gift of life. Aykanna means constancy, embodiment in life. Aph - personal orientation. Arha - earth, b "- means living; b" arha - a combination of form and energy, spiritualized matter.
Hawvlah lachma d "sunqanan yaomana (Official translation: Give us our daily bread for this day)
Literal: Hawvlah translates to give (gifts of the soul and gifts of the material). lachma - bread necessary, vital for maintaining life, understanding of life (chma - growing passion, growth, increase). D "sunqanan - needs, what I can own, how much I could carry; yaomana - necessary to maintain the spirit, life force.
Washboqlan khuabayn aykana daph khan shbwoqan l "khayyabayn.
(Official translation: And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors)
Literal: Khuabayn translates as debts, internal accumulated energies that destroy us; in some texts, instead of khuabayn is wakhtahayn, which is translated as unfulfilled hopes. Aykana - letting go (passive voluntary action).
Wela tahlan l "nesyuna (Official translation: And do not lead us into temptation)
Literal: Wela tahlan translates to "don't let us in"; l "nesyuna - illusion, fluctuation anxiety, gross matter; symbolic translation - wandering mind.
Ela patzan min bisha. (Official translation: but deliver us from the evil one)
Literal: Ela – immaturity; symbolic translation - inappropriate actions. Patzan - untie, give freedom; min bisha - from evil
Metol dilakhie malkutha wahayla wateshbukhta l "ahlam almin. (Official translation: For Yours is the Kingdom and the power and the glory forever.)
Literal: Metol dilakhie is translated as the idea of owning something that bears fruit (ploughed land); malkutha - kingdom, kingdom, symbolic translation - "I can"; wahayla - the concept of life force, energy, tuning in unison that supports life; wateshbukhta - glory, harmony, Divine power, symbolic translation - generating fire; l "ahlam almin - from century to century.
Ameyn. (Official translation: Amen.)
Ameyn - manifestation of the will, affirmation, swearing an oath. Instills strength and spirit in everything created
While surfing the Internet, I came across one interesting note: "The literal translation of the Our Father in Aramaic." I was interested in the name itself and, having opened the link, I began to look for this prayer. To my surprise, I found something that I was not looking for, something that, in my opinion, went beyond the truth.
The translation of the Lord's Prayer from Aramaic into Russian was as follows:
"Oh Breathing Life,
Your name shines everywhere!
Free up space
Your "I can" now!
Sprout through us bread and
Everything comes from you
Vision, Power and Song
From meeting to meeting!
I could not believe my eyes, my spirit resisted reading this, I will not be ashamed of expressions - nonsense that the author passed off as a literal translation of a prayer from Aramaic into Russian. I looked at various links on the Internet and was amazed at how many links say the same thing. People ignorantly copying the text, share it with others, passing it off as some kind of secret truth. Reading this "translation", for some reason, I immediately remembered the Gnostics (a heretical sect of the 1st-2nd centuries AD), who propagated some secret teaching of Christ, which gives enlightenment to man and an understanding of all things and pantheism (heresy of the 4th century AD, exists to this day).
One of the authors who posted this nonsense on the Internet claimed that it was the Aramaic language that was the dominant and primary version of the written text of the New Testament. The Peshitta (Syriac translation of the Bible, Aramaic dialect), was based on the translation of the Aramaic Targum, which means that the Greek version of the New Testament was later than the Peshita, and was only a translation from Aramaic, the very one that was native to Jesus Christ and the apostles. In other words, the Greek version is not primary. Assuring readers, the author shares a false "translation from the original language" into Russian.
Before moving on to the direct separation of the "flies from the cutlets", let me recall a little from the Christian story:
There are several ancient translations of the Holy Scriptures into various languages: the Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament, Targums is a common name for translations of the Old Testament into Aramaic, the Vulgate is a translation of the Bible into Latin, and Peshita is one of the translations of the Bible into Syriac (Edessa dialect of Aramaic). language). The author's hypothesis, according to which the Peshitta was based on a translation of the Aramaic Targum, does not stand up to criticism and does not pass the support of theologians, scientists, history. However, there are elements of Targum influence in the text of the Syriac Old Testament (especially in the Pentateuch of Moses and Chronicles). But the style and level of Peshitta translation of the Old Testament books varies quite a lot in different parts of Scripture. Some parts of it may have been translated by the Syrian-speaking Jews before the rise of the Christian Church, while others may have been reworked by the first baptized Jews.
Speaking of the Aramaic language, it should be noted that in the Hellenistic era and up to the Arab conquest, he successfully competed with Greek, leaving behind all the other Semitic languages the role of local dialects. But since the 2nd century, the ancient Aramaic language, which was spoken by the entire Middle East, including Egypt, has undergone changes and strong modifications under the influence of various cultures and after the conquest of the Arabs (7th century AD).
Historically, it should be noted that the books of the Old Testament were translated into Syriac in the last quarter of the 2nd century CE. e., the New Testament books were translated by the beginning of the 5th century AD. and, apparently, were grouped and reworked by the Bishop of Edessa, Rabbula. That is, by the 5th century AD, the Peshita as such had already been formed (the very name "Peshitta", in relation to the standard (generally accepted) Syriac Bible, appeared only in the 9th century AD).
But refuting historicity, there are still people who claim that all the teachings of Christ and the apostles were taught only in Aramaic, and that it, being the language of the original text, preceded the text of Scripture in the Koine Greek dialect. It is also surprising that this position is mainly taken by the separating views of Nestorianism (the heresy of the 4th century, dividing Christ into a simple man before baptism and the Son of God after that, i.e. rejecting one single person and hypostasis).
When studying biblical studies, we remember that there is a synoptic problem (similarity and differences in the Gospels). And today there is no firm conviction as to why it exists, there are only various hypotheses, each of which has its pros and cons. Today, one of the most realistic hypotheses is that Matthew and Luke, writing the gospel, used a certain source "Q", from the German "Quelle" (source), whether this source was part of the sayings of Jesus Christ in Aramaic or not, It is not known, although some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels are translations from the Aramaic language, but be that as it may, it is believed that the text of the Gospel in its current form was compiled precisely in Greek, like other texts of the New Testament. In addition, the Greek language of the books of the New Testament is accepted by the Fathers of the Church as the language of the original texts, without any discussion. There is plenty of other evidence that, after all, it was Koine (a dialect of the Greek language) that was the original text of the New Testament. I would also like to note that to this day not a single manuscript of fragments of the books of the New Testament in Aramaic has been found, the text of which would be dated earlier than the Koine Greek of the New Testament.
Recalling a little history, we understand that no “original text in Aramaic” has been found (according to my convictions, it does not exist, because God allowed the Scripture to form in the form in which we see Him, have, and with the language found in ancient manuscripts). Now about the prayer "Our Father" and the author of this "translation". To do this, let's turn our attention again to the "literal translation from Aramaic" presented to us:
"Oh Breathing Life,
Your name shines everywhere!
Free up space
To plant Your presence!
Imagine in your imagination
Your "I can" now!
Clothe Your desire in every light and form!
Sprout through us bread and
Insight for every moment!
Untie the knots of failure that bind us
As we free the rope ropes
by which we restrain the misdeeds of others!
Help us not to forget our Source.
But free us from the immaturity of not being in the Present!
Everything comes from you
Vision, Power and Song
From meeting to meeting!
Amen. May our next actions grow from here.”
To begin with, it should be noted that the prayer "Our Father" was written in ancient Greek, and this translation is only a kind of "crooked reconstruction of the meaning" with a deliberate misleading of the reader. We know that there are fragments, as part of the sayings of Christ, translated from Aramaic, one of such fragments is the prayer of Christ on the cross of Golgotha, but among all the fragments we know, there is not a single mention of the "prayer of our Father" in Aramaic.
In addition, in ancient Aramaic, as well as in Hebrew and Ancient Greek, the appeal to God always went in a bunch of masculine personal pronouns, but not as feminine or neuter. Is it possible to imagine that a patriarchal culture, where the leading and dominant role in the family, the state and politics belonged to a man, suddenly allows an appeal to God, as to some unknown feminine power that has no personality? Of course not! More than one Jew of a monotheistic religion, brought up in a patriarchal culture, knowing the books of the Law, will never allow himself to turn to God the Creator, as the author of this “translation” of the Our Father prayer offers us.
We say and understand that Scripture is interpreted by Scripture alone. Jesus, in his teaching, repeatedly drew the attention of his disciples to the Father, from whom he descended and to whom he is going again. He spoke about the Father's love in deeds, parables, in the history of the people, in Scripture. He emphasized His oneness with the Father, but the Person of the Father, as presiding over the Trinity. He never taught that the Father can be addressed as some unknown power. The Russian word “Father (parent)”, in Aramaic, as well as in Hebrew, sounds like “Aba (Abba)”, in Greek “Pater”. Addressing God the Father as "Our Father" in Hebrew sounds like "Avinu", in Aramaic "Avvun". But it is surprising that the author of the so-called “translation” of the Our Father prayer never used the word Father, and it is precisely this word that is the main and central one in this prayer. On the contrary, I believe that the word "father" was deliberately omitted to show the false "greatness" of a literal prayer devoid of any meaning and power of the Spirit, passing it off as a secret truth! Based on the teachings of Christ, we see how this “translation” destroys the essence of God the Father as a Person, passing him off as some kind of power, thereby undermining relations within the Trinity and with people. Presented to the masses for review, the so-called "translation" of the Lord's Prayer is nothing more than a heresy, a fusion of Gnosticism and pantheism, a heresy that the Church has struggled with for centuries. This fusion can now be seen in movements such as the New Age (New Age), which go out of their way to declare the syncretism of religions, the destruction of true Christianity, and the rejection of the Christian idea of a personal Creator God, opposing to it the idea of an impersonal deity.
Now, as for the author himself who made this “translation” and threw it into the world: The author of this “translation” is Doctor of Religion and Somatic (Bodily-Oriented) Psychology Saadi Neil Douglas-Klotz (Murshid Saadi Shakur Chishti). His main interests lie in the area of combining ancient meditation techniques with modern psychology and body science. He is a specialist in the field of Middle Eastern mysticism, the author of several books devoted to the study of the so-called authentic message contained in the primary sources of world religions - "Prayers of the Cosmos: Meditation on the words of Jesus, spoken in Aramaic" (by the way, it is likely that this presented "translation" is an excerpt from the same book), "Wisdom of the Deserts", "The Hidden Gospel", "The Sufi Book of Life".
Murshid Saadi (Neil Douglas-Klotz) - is one of the senior teachers of the Sufi order Ruhaniat (Sufi Ruhaniat International), follows the so-called "Sufi path" for about 30 years. In Russia he is known as one of the founders of the World Peace Dance Network. Using the Sufi technique - Zikr (the practice of remembering one's true nature, using meditation and singing) and dancing with the use of mantras of various religious and national traditions, he proposes "to establish a real contact of a person with himself, both with his depths and with his heights ... ".
God is a Just Judge, He will judge everyone who rejects Christ as a Savior and personal Lord. God will judge anyone who leads a person astray by presenting a lie as the truth. But from us, as from Christians following the Lord, no one removed the responsibility for our salvation, regardless of who or what we met on our way. Satan has not stopped walking around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour!
Studying the “literal translation of the Lord’s Prayer” offered for viewing by everyone, I also noticed that it is distributed mainly not on Christian resources, but on various heretics that have their own affiliation to the New Age or share views with it - sites on mysticism , esotericism, meditation, parapsychology, talking about some secret teachings and truth. Someone distributes these texts, copying them on the pages of their websites and blogs, someone through statements in the statuses of social networks. It is surprising that Christians, reading these texts, without delving into the very essence of what they read, themselves continue to spread this nonsense on the Internet, passing it off as the truth, while others, echoing them, send it further. A spreading infection settles not only on the Internet, but also in the minds of many people. Some Christians, reading the text, manage to leave flattering comments on it like: “It's cool”, “Amen. Truly so”, “Thank you for the literal translation, now I will know.” What to know? Why shout Amen? What's cool? They read and shout, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God! It's a shame to eat everything, not understanding what they feed you! (sorry for the directness of the expression).
Now, knowing a little about the history of translations of Scripture and the author of this “translation” of the Lord’s Prayer, I think it’s not difficult to understand that the so-called “literal translation of the Our Father” distributed on the Internet has nothing to do with the real prayer of Christ, but is only heresy, deliberately aimed at undermining the Christian doctrine and the destruction of Christianity as a whole!
Due to the fact that the ancient Aramaic language is considered dead (Aramaic (a new Aramaic dialect) is spoken only in Syria), an approximate translation of the Lord's Prayer in it will look like this:
“Avvun dbishmaya! nitkaddah shimmuh; aunt boy; neve sovyanukh eychana dbishmaya ab para; Ha la lahma dsunkanan yumana; Vushyuh lan hobain, eychana dap akhnan shuklan hayavin; vula taalan lnisyuna, ella pasan min bishya. Mudtul diluh chai malchuta, uheila, utishbukhta l’alam allmin. Amine". (Our Father, who art in heaven! hallowed be Thy name; Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven; give us our daily bread this day; and forgive us our debts, as we also forgive debtors ours, and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.)
Summing up what has been said, I would like to call everyone to comprehend everything we read. Dear friends, on the Internet, a lot of things are spreading, both good and bad, watch what you read and spread. Do not distribute the so-called "literal translation of the Lord's Prayer" on the net, or in any other way, do not pass it off as a lost truth, it has neither depth nor the power of the Spirit! After all, there are those who are weak, who do not understand, who read everything in a row and swallow everything they read, who cannot separate the wheat from the tares, those who will be tempted, who will believe, and as a result may fall away, because. allow doubts to settle in your heart. And the Lord will ask us for it.
Everything that we need, Christ left in the Scripture, transmitted through the patriarchs, prophets, apostles! Do not mislead weak sheep, do not think that there is some hidden meaning where there is none. When analyzing sermons, references, texts, statements of people, check them with Scripture, is it exactly the way it is presented? Remember at least fragments of the New Testament: “These were more prudent than Thessalonica: they received the word with all diligence, daily examining the Scriptures, whether this is exactly so” (Acts 17:11), “Look into yourself and into the doctrine; do this constantly: for by doing this you will save yourself and those who hear you” (1 Tim. 4:16).
Knowing the truth, let us hold fast to the Scriptures, neither deviating to the right nor to the left!
Probably, the first post should repeat the message from which - at the suggestion and with the direct participation of some friends - this community began.
Let's start with the New Testament. Oleg Shevkun prompted me to study ancient Greek (probably without knowing it) in 2000. We then translated together in Amsterdam. I don’t remember what he said then, but his words infected me with the confidence that you can learn Greek on your own. And so in the fall I took on Machen, whom I defeated in about six months. Before reaching the end of the tutorial, from the 20th lesson he began to read the New Testament in Greek. I didn’t have my own copy then, but Pasha Begichev helped ( pavel_begichev ), to whom some missionary gave an outdated and unnecessary Nestle-Aland of the 24th or 25th edition. I began to read right from the place where I had read the Russian Bible then (I remember that somewhere in the pastor's letters). I didn't understand much at first, but I kept reading anyway. As I reached the end of Machen's tutorial, I understood more.
Through a short time- already next spring (2001) - one good man gave me Wallace's textbook (Daniel Wallace. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics).
In the introductory lessons, I read about the stylistic features of the speech of the New Testament authors and began to read more systematically - from simple to complex. First, I re-read the whole of John (the Gospel, three epistles and Revelation). Then all the letters signed with the name of Paul (Romans - Philemon). Then the Synoptic Gospels, ending with Luke, then Acts, and lastly Hebrews. It took me about 1 year to read the New Testament in Greek for the first time. Then I re-read the entire New Testament. Now I was more prepared for reading and could read in succession. The vocabulary accumulated during this time allowed me to read almost without looking into the dictionary, so I re-read the New Testament for the second time, probably in about six months. Of course, some books—those I preached from—I reread not twice, but many times. It seemed to me that I could quote Romans and 2 Peter immediately in Greek. Now, of course, much has been forgotten ...
Reading the Old Testament it was much more difficult. If the Greek language is similar in structure to Russian, and many roots were known to me from medicine, philosophy or in English, then Hebrew was like a language from another planet. Not a single association, all words are the same length and eerily similar to each other, root letters are lost and disappear, so Nathan turns into lies- yes, yes, it is the same root! I had to be smart: the sea pits, blood ladies, Ahab loved Jezebel… (the reader understands! :-) In general, so far I have acquired the minimum lexicon and learned to more or less consistently recognize weak roots in various forms, more than one month passed. But I diligently continued to read.
Here is how it was. I began to study Hebrew, as far as I remember, at the beginning of 2004. Having passed the initial grammar, I began to read the Old Testament in Hebrew - again from the place where I read the Bible in Russian at that time, these were the minor prophets. At first I understood very little. In 2005, he began to read the Old Testament from the beginning and in succession, according to the arrangement of the books in the Hebrew Bible. Having read to the end of the Pentateuch, I could already read narrative (narrative) texts quite freely. All this time, for convenience, I used the publication " Holy Scriptures in Russian and Hebrew":
That same year, in the fall, I entered the Masters, where I immersed myself even more in the world of the Old Testament. It turned out that a lot of ThM students regularly and quite fluently read Hebrew. An example for me was Abner Chow, who carried the Stuttgart edition of the Hebrew Bible with him every day and read it without a dictionary during breaks. The obligatory course in the seminary was Aramaic, where we read and translated all the Aramaic parts of the Old Testament. Subsequently, I took up the study of classical Syriac, which is one of the Aramaic dialects. Therefore, when I got to the books of Ezra and Daniel in independent reading, it was already much easier. By this time, I was already using A Reader's Hebrew and Greek Bible, which was given to me by a good friend. In this very convenient edition, at the bottom of each page, translations are given of words that occur less than 30 times for Greek, less than 25 times for Aramaic, and less than 100 times for Hebrew, so that you do not need to constantly look for rarer words in lexicons.
Well, in general, I read, read, read ... And after six years I finished reading it :-) Of course, at that time I also read New Testament books from time to time. Of course, in Greek, because no translation can replace the original and can not be compared with it! Quite rightly wrote Martin Luther in his address to the councilors of all the cities of the German land:
- ... it is a sin and a shame that we do not know either the book intended ... for us, nor the language and word of our Lord. And it is even more sinful and harmful that we do not even strive to learn languages, especially now that God has given us such an opportunity, has given us mentors, and books, and everything that is needed for this, and also pushes us to this and willingly opens His book before us.
