BAR BAHLUL Enters the Ring... via Mr. Ring

Photo by britannica.com

"So... Bar Bahlul  said you are a ROPE ...
a SHIP'S ROPE, to be exact ? " 

Mr. Steven Ring, an Aramaic scholar well-known on the internet, graciously translated Bar Bahlul's Aramaic Lexicon entry for readers. 

Bar Bahlul's Aramaic Lexicon found on Dukhrana gives the ONLY Aramaic hint that GaMLa could possibly have ever been  translated to be ROPE instead of CAMEL. The reference is 500:19, 1691:9 as found at Matthew 19:24. 

Below, highlighted, are Mr. Ring's copy-righted insights plus translation. 

Tie that camel up with a rope!

The controversy surrounding the Syriac gospel reading found in Mt19v24, Mk10v25 & Lk18v25.

Mar Aphrahat writing in the early 4th  century quotes this verse (Wright 1869, page 392, line 16), so a reading with the Syriac word gamlā was likely also in Tatian's 2nd  century Diatessaron Syriac gospel harmony. 

The 10th  century east-Syrian Syro-Arabic lexicon of Hassan bar Bahlul (Duval 1901, columns 500, 501) reports that gamlā can mean a camel, or the thick rope used to tie up boats.

He writes about several different definitions for this word, but I [ Steven Ring]  translate only those of interest:

500.20: '[According to] Cyril [of Alexandria] gamlā he calls the thick rope boats are tied up with.'

...

gap

...

501.01: 'And in the Greek language, Qamelos

501.02: it is called. Others say that gamlā is

501.03: what our Lord said in the worshipful gospel, that

501.04: the gamlā is thin to pass through the eye of a needle

501.05: for he said that gamlā was threaded.'

The same is reported by Toma Audo in his east-Syrian Syro-Arabic lexicon called the Treasury of the Syriac Language, (Audo 1897, pages 145, 146):

146.1.6: 'Again the thick rope of boats.'

And by Carl Brockelmann in his Lexicon Syriacum, (Brockelmann 1928, page 120) where he mentions that several earlier scholars defined gamlā as 'rudens navis' = nautical rope.

Hence to extract the most probable meaning of this saying in the gospel, it can and probably should be translated:

‘…it is easier for a ship’s rope to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom…’

The misunderstanding in the Greek text which translates gamlā as ‘camel’ is due to the ambiguity of the Syriac word gamlā. The usual English reading translated from the Greek NT with the comic notion of threading a camel through the eye of a needle, is evidence that the Greek gospels are a translation of Syriac textual originals.

Hence, this verse contains evidence both for the originality of the Peshiṭta Syriac gospel text-type and also that Tatian constructed his gospel harmony from a Syriac gospel source. 

References:

Audo, Thoma 1897. ‘Treasury of the Syriac language’ 2 volumes. Dominican Press, Mosul.

Brockelmann, Carl 1928. 'Lexicon syriacum' 2nd Ed. Max Niemeyer, Halle.

Duval, Rubens 1901. 'Lexicon syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule voces syriacas græcasque cum glossis syriacis et arabicis complectens; e pluribus codicibus edidit et notulis instruxit' 3 volumes, Paris.

Wright, William 1869 ‘The homilies of Aphraates the Persian sage’ Williams & Norgate, London & Edinburgh

© Steven Ring 2013 

Sister Judith Hannah extends her great appreciation for the scholarly work and gracious attitude of some of the scholars who have been so helpful in this research, especially Mr. Lars Lindgren at Dukhrana   and Mr. Steven Ring.

[ But, we are not finished yet.... :>)  ]

A GREEK KAM-I-LON ... in the Peshitta ?



"Can't you see I am a kam-A-lon-- a camel--,
not a kam-I-lon  -- a rope-- ? " 
photo by pocketculture.com


~ or ~

Why 
must we resort to GREEK sources
instead of Aramaic 

to find that CAMEL means ROPE... 

since the Aramaic translations
seem to be 
the ONLY ones
currently transforming 
a CAMEL into a ROPE ?

?  ?  ? ??????????? ?  ? 

 In the Nestle-Aland  Greek New Testament (1979, 12th printing, 1991 edition) are 7 New Covenant Greek manuscripts that have this kam-I-lon variant ...

...yes, 7...
( out of hundreds, at least )

that have appeared in some of the Aramaic English translations
which prefer ROPE
rather than
the bona fide CAMEL ! 

Let us recall some facts: ( all verifiable if the reader should choose to do so. But let me warn you: it takes a LOT of time.)

The texts online at Dukhrana's fine collection have oftentimes NO vowel pointings for the Aramaic word for "camel," GaMLa, as in Mr. Steven Silver's Khabouris T manuscript and Mr. Paul Younan's manuscript.  

The Aramaic texts online at Dukhrana which DO retain vowel pointings, as in the "G, B, and H" Netzarim volume, have the normal vowel pointings which marks GaMLa as "camel."

The vowel pointings ARE marked as GaMLa, (which is correctly translated as "CAMEL")  in the Dukhrana Aramaic texts of :

· Khabouris C

· Peshitta New Testament, New York, 1886 Mingana Manuscript

· Syriac Manuscript 148-38a

... And this is TRUE for all 3 mis-translated verses in question:

• Matthew 19:24,
• Mark 10:25, and
• Luke 18:25.

Yes, all three verses of YESHUA+ HA MASHIYACH+ 'S  very words have the  mis-translation of "rope," in the "golden, best, and historic" Netzarim volume,  according to the existing VOWEL POINTS of GaMLA found in the Eastern texts listed above. 

They were changed into "ROPE" in the English translations of Mr. Younan and Mr. Lamsa... and the "Golden, Best, and Historic" Bible translation published by the Netzarim Publishing House... with apparently no vowel pointings able to be found to substantiate the change... if vowel pointings are indeed the crucial difference, as written in the GB & H volume !  

Now, do keep in mind that the Netzarim "Golden, Best, and Historic" version says that GaMLa (camel)  is actually a ROPE... due to it being a GaMaLa.   ( page 56 of the Mis-Pag. Edition, footnote 182, for Matthew 19:24).

NOW... LET US LOOK

AT THE GREEK RESOUCES....

Since there are none in the Aramaic. 

MATTHEW 19:24  

And again I+ say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of GOD.

(The young, TORAH-observant man with great possessions went away sorrowful. )

Nestle-Aland Greek Text lists in a bottom footnote the manuscript variant  for "camel" as being  kam-I-lon (rope) here... so few ( i.e., "p c" ) that N-A does not even mention or record the actual manuscripts. 

The fine Byzantine Greek Textform  work of Robinson-Pierpont have NO mention of any variant. 

MARK 10:25

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of GOD.

( The rich, TORAH-observant man went away sad.)  

The Nestle-Aland manuscript variants listing kam-I-lon  (rope) instead of "camel" are two:

manuscript 13 and manuscript 28 pc of the miniscules.  No variants are listed at all by Robinson and Pierpont's Byzantine Textform. 

LUKE 18:25 

For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of GOD!

(The rich, Torah-observant ruler went away sorrowful here, too.) 

The Nestle-Aland Greek text lists these manuscripts with ROPE ( kam-I-lon) instead of camel in its footnotes here. They are variants found in:

S, f13 manuscripts, 1010 manuscript, and 1424 al ( Latin for "others"), but the "others" are not significant enough to be listed.

No variants are listed by Robinson and Pierpont.

HERE is a TIMELY FACT to consider as well...

Although the GREEK manuscripts do have a few... a VERY FEW... places where ROPE is written in the Greek instead  of CAMEL, the TIME-FRAME of those few manuscripts is of utmost importance to this discussion. 

WHY ? 

The earliest manuscript

which contains such a variant

is dated at the 9th Century !

• p c ... un-datable
• Greek manuscript 13 .... 13th century
• Greek manuscript 28 ... 11th century
• Greek S uncial , dated 949 ... 10th century 
• f13 .... 10th century
• Greek manuscript 1010 ... 12th century
• Greek manuscripts 1424al...9 &10th century

So... how did Mr. Lamsa of Peshitta translation fame and the others who followed his translation,  find ROPE to put it into their translation of the ancient Aramaic text ? 

Futhermore... where did Mr. Lamsa find ROPE ... since it is not found in the Aramaic itself ... but only in these isolated, late GREEK manuscripts ?

Any theories, anyone ?

( I have a few,

based on this surprising 

GREEK text information. )

Coming soon: Elucidation on these Scripture verses by Pre-Nicene, historical Christian writers: Clement of Alexandria ( circa 153-217)  and Origen ( circa 185- 254) ... just in case readers adhere to Prosperity Theology, in either the Greek OR Aramaic camps ! / Sr. Judith Hannah  + + +

The CAMELS are Marching !

~ or ~
The Evidence is Mounting !

Photo by Wysinfo.com

A Look at the CAMEL Variants

as found in the ancient

New Covenant texts...

Nestle-Aland's Greek New Testament, while certainly not my favorite for accuracy, has made a valuable contribution in the researching and listing of manuscripts of the New Covenant.

Considering that there are THOUSANDS of manuscripts and fragments of the Greek New Covenant, Nestle-Aland's work stands as a classic, in this regard especially, in spite of their eclectic text. [ 1979 edition, 12th printing, 1991]

This Nestle-Aland volume is helpful in tracking down the CAMEL vs ROPE discrepancy found in the "Golden, Best, and Historic" ( GBH ) version of an Aramaic English translation published by the Netzarim publishing house.

This discrepancy is only found in the Aramaic TRANSLATIONS, not in the actual Aramaic texts themselves.

The texts online at Dukhrana's collection have oftentimes NO vowel pointings for the Aramaic word for "camel," GaMLa, as in Mr. Steven Silver's Khabouris T manuscript and Mr. Paul Younan's manuscript.  

The Aramaic texts which DO retain vowel pointings, as in the "G, B, and H" Netzarim volume, have the normal vowel pointings which marks GaMLa as "camel."

The vowel pointings ARE marked as GaMLa, (which is correctly translated as "CAMEL")  in the Dukhrana Aramaic texts of :

• Khabouris C
• Peshitta New Testament, New York, 1886 Mingana Manuscript
• Syriac Manuscript 148-38a

... And this is TRUE for all 3 mis-translated verses in question: Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25.

Yes, all three verses of YESHUA+ HA MASHIYACH+ 'S  very words are mis-translated as "rope," according to the existing VOWEL POINTS of GaMLA found in the Eastern texts listed above. 

They were changed into ROPE in the English translations of Mr. Younan and Mr. Lamsa... and the "Golden, Best, and Historic" Bible translation published by the Netzarim Publishing House... with apparently no vowel pointings able to be found to substantiate the change !  

Recall that the Netzarim "Golden, Best, and Historic" version says that GaMLa is actually a "GaMaLah"... a rope... due to the vowel pointings, ( page 56   of the Mis-Pag. Edition, footnote 182, for Matthew 19:24).

Unfortunately, these particular vowel pointings, claimed to make a ROPE out of a CAMEL,  are nowhere to be found!

They are not even in the Aramaic text itself that is SUPPOSED to be translated in that volume ! 

Significantly and in opposition to the erroneous translation of the Netzarim Bible, in the two other parallel verses in Mark 10:25 and Luke 18:25, the vowel pointings are the same as in the text of Matthew 19:24... the vowel pointings which make the word CAMEL not ROPE.

The vowel pointings making CAMEL into ROPE are also not found in the Aramaic Lexicons, Klein's Semitic Etymology, or the other Aramaic texts themselves which are available online for all to see, through Dukhrana.

?   ?   ?

Where, then , is the linguistic authority to verify even this claim that GaMaLah means ROPE ? 

Where also is the written grammar or lexicon reference which verifies that an extra vowel point is added ... and indeed, that word is USED in Aramaic literature... to make another, bona fide Aramaic word out of GaMLa ?   

Why Go to the Greek Manuscripts

to check an Aramaic discrepancy ?

RIGHT!

By far the  most logical place to check the Aramaic CAMEL vs. ROPE word would be to look   in the Aramaic resources: Aramaic lexicons, Semitic etymology volumes, and such Aramaic online resources as Dukhrana and the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon ( CAL )   for that word GaMLa, camel, and the rope word, GaMaLah.

In ALL the Aramaic resources listed above (and in earlier posts), however, "GaMLa" and its compounds and prefixed forms retain the definition of CAMEL... never ROPE.  

And GaMaLah is just not found !

Because Aramaic is actually a conglomeration of several Semitic dialects, the goodly Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon found online at Dukhrana allows readers to check EACH WORD in a verse. It displays the Aramaic dialect of each word used and its slightly different shades of meaning.

A most excellent, scholarly tool ! 

It has been developed by HEBREW, not GREEK, scholars at the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati, Ohio.  

For instance, let us look momentarily at the Aramaic word for ROPE found in the New Covenant.  ROPE  is actually "CHaBL"... much like the English word "cable." 

The interesting thing is that "CHaBL" ( for rope) is found in ALL THESE ARAMAIC DIALECTS: 

• Jewish Literary Aramaic, Targumic
• Galilean
• Palestinian Targumic Aramaic
• Christian Palestinian Aramaic
• Samaritan
• Syriac
• Late Jewish Literary Aramaic

Now note this: CAL also listed other definitions in these various dialects for "CHaBL" which were somewhat related to ROPE or CORD:

• Syriac ... a measuring line or line
• Syriac and Late Jewish Literary Aramaic ... snare
• Galilean and Syriac ... region
• Syriac ... seashore or space
• Syriac and Late Jewish Literary Aramaic ... a flame, a twisted thing.  

However, no "CAMEL" was to be found hiding within the Aramaic word for  "ROPE" ... and vice versa !

Photo by Flickr.com

The Greek Documentation 

Because: the Aramaic resources of lexicons, Dukhrana, CAL, and their quoted references:

• NEVER list GaMLa and its forms as ROPE
• ALWAYS list GaMLa  as CAMEL 
• ALWAYS list CHaBL as ROPE
• NEVER list ROPE    for GaMLa
• and NEVER include the "GaMaLah" form to mean ROPE

... as found in the New Covenant Peshitta and other old writings...

then: the only other resource available to locate this anomoly, this odd Aramaic  discrepancy .... is the Greek ! 

  

 ( More to come on this exciting find. )