Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Psa 16:10; chasideycha

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Numberup AT worldnet.att.net
  • To: peter_kirk AT sil.org, Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Psa 16:10; chasideycha
  • Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 09:16:30 -0800


I have two copies of the standard (Ben Asher) text used by Jewish
translations which
have the extra yod, ("chasideykha") but with the note that it should be read
without
it ("chasidkha"). These two texts are found in "Tehillim," published by
Mesorah
Publications, and "The Soncino Books of the Bible: The Psalms." In both
instances,
these Jewish translators followed the singular reading and translated "Your
devout
one" and "Thy godly one," respectively.

I believe the Ben Asher text dates from the 10th century, C.E., but every
modern
Jewish translation I have translates in the singular, "chasidkha." It is
also
translated as a singular in the pre-Christian version produced by Jews in the
2nd
century BCE, the Greek Septuagint, which has "ton hosion," Your holy/loyal
one."

Solomon Landers
Memra Institute for Biblical Research
http://www.memrain.org

peter_kirk AT sil.org wrote:

> The BHS text at this point in Psalm 16:10 is X:ASIYD:KF (in your
> transliteration this would be chasidkha), which is singular - no yod
> before the -kha ending. There is no textual note in BHS, and no note
> in HOTTP or the Word commentary. But are there other MSS, printed
> editions or translations which have a plural here? Could this be a
> correction, or an interpretation, to get away from the Christian
> understanding of this verse, in Acts 13:35?
>
> Peter Kirk
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
> _________________________________
> Subject: Psa 16:10; chasideycha
> Author: <devious AT carol.net> at Internet
> Date: 30/11/1999 00:00
>
> Greetings,
>
> Could someone point me in the right direction with this, I am not a Hebrew
> scholar.
> Isn't chasideycha plural? And if it plural then why is it translated in the
> singular?
>
> Gratefully,
> Lee Deavers
>
> ---





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page