Home >> Cyclopedia Of Biblical Literature >> Day Of Atonement to Education >> Diind

Diind

version, hebrew and persian

DIIND, that he was a contemporary of the editor, and that he made this version for this edi tion of the Pentateuch. It may, however, be ques tioned whether the words, which he interpreted for us,' refer to the editor, or mean that Tusi made this version for us—i. e. the Jewish nation ; and whether the formula V")=r11/ Will, he reposes in Paradise, refer to Tusi's father or to Tusi himself. We incline to the latter view, and hence agree with Fiirst that Tusi flourished in the 13th century. His Persian version of the Pentateuch was first published in Hebrew characters, with the Hebrew text of the Pentateuch, Onkelos' Chaldee para phrase, Saadia's Arabic translation, and Rashi's commentary, Constantinople 1546. It was then transcribed from this edition into the Arabico Persian character, and printed in Walton's Poly Klatt, vol. iv. Besides the Pentateuch there is a Persian version, in the Paris Library, of the Pro phets and Hagiographa, as well as of the Apo crypha, which was most probably also made by Tusi. Thus Catal. imprime, MS. Hebr. No. 34, contains the version of Genesis and Exodus, with the Hebrew original after each verse. No. 35

contains the version of Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy in a similar manner. No. 4o con tains Job and Lamentations, as well as a Persian elegy for the ninth of Ab, bewailing the destruction of the temple [FAsTs]. No. 44 contains'Isaiah and Jerendah in the Hebrew character. No. 45 Daniel as well as an apocryphal history of this prophet. No. 46, written in the year 1460, alsa contains a version of Daniel, with various readings of older MSS. ; Fond de Saint-Germain-des-Pres, No. 224, contains the Book of Esther, with the Hebrew original, as well as a Rabbinical Calendar in Persian, completed in 1290, and extending to 1522. No. 236 contains a version of the Apo crypha in the Hebrew character, written in 1600 ; the book of Tobit is different from the common Greek text, Judith and Bel and the Dragon agree with the Vulgate, whilst the Book of Maccabees is simply the Meg/Bath Antiochns, olyoniN nn