וַיֹּאמֶר֩ ל֨וֹ מִיכָ֜ה שְׁבָ֣ה עִמָּדִ֗י וֶֽהְיֵה־לִי֮ לְאָ֣ב וּלְכֹהֵן֒ וְאָנֹכִ֨י אֶֽתֶּן־לְךָ֜ עֲשֶׂ֤רֶת כֶּ֨סֶף֙ לַיָּמִ֔ים וְעֵ֥רֶךְ בְּגָדִ֖ים וּמִחְיָתֶ֑ךָ וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ הַלֵּוִֽי׃
10Then Micah said to him, “Stay with me, and be to me a father and a priest, and I will give you ten pieces of silver a year, a set of clothes, and your living.”
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated with “clothes” or similar in English is translated in Enlhet as “crawling-in-stuff” (source: Jacob Loewen in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 169ff. ) and in Noongar as bwoka or “Kangaroo skin” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
See also cloth and cloak / shawl.
Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:
“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo (Dinė)), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”
In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
For Guhu-Samane, Ernest Richert (in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. ) reports this: “The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”
For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:
Bau cha r (បូជាចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.
See also idolatrous priests.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Judges 17:10:
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, natte (なって) or “become” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way to do this is through the usage of lexical honorific forms, i.e., completely different words, as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, sashiageru (差し上げる), a respectful form of ageru (あげる) or “give” is used.
(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
See also respectful form of “give” (kudasaru) and give (Japanese honorifics).
Micah is delighted to hear the Levite’s response. He offers his home and a handsome salary to the Levite for his services as a priest. In some cultures this offer may be considered a positive act, but for the Israelites it went against God’s Law. God’s people were not supposed to set up their own places of worship.
And Micah said to him: This clause introduces Micah’s response to the Levite. In this context the Hebrew waw conjunction rendered And may be translated “Then” (New Revised Standard Version, New International Version) or “So.” Many versions omit it (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version).
Stay with me: The Hebrew verb rendered Stay (yashab) is not the same one translated “sojourned” in verse 17.7. This verb means “live” or “stay” in a place. With me suggests that Micah is asking the Levite to stay in his home. In biblical times and in many places in the world today, people live in big complexes with many family members. There are often multiple houses connected to the main one for guests and extended family. New International Version renders this clause as “Live with me,” and Contemporary English Version says “Why don’t you stay here with me?” which is a natural way of expressing this invitation in English.
And be to me a father and a priest: The verbal phrase be to me means “become for me.” We may say “you can act as my….” By asking the Levite to become a father for him, Micah is taking him as his spiritual leader and guide (compare Gen 45.8). Good News Translation says “adviser,” and Contemporary English Version is more explicit: “You can be my priest and tell me what God wants me to do.” However, it seems better to keep the word father if at all possible. There is certainly some irony here. verse 17.7 underlines the fact that this Levite is “a young man,” so in a certain sense this is reversing cultural norms of that era. Such a relationship, with the younger leading the elder, would be considered inappropriate and even ridiculous. More likely than not, the storyteller is trying to point out how foolish Micah was. Pushing even further, the narrator may be making a very subtle comparison between the courageous Deborah, a “mother” in Israel (verse 5.7), and this young man, who was anything but a heroic father figure. As the story unfolds, this person will show very little loyalty to Micah.
And I will give you ten pieces of silver a year, and a suit of apparel, and your living: Micah’s style of speech here shows exaggerated politeness. The Hebrew pronoun for I is emphatic, so we can begin this clause with “And I, I will give you…” or “As for me, I promise to give you….”
Micah promises ten pieces of silver a year to the Levite as a salary. Ten pieces of silver (literally “ten silver”) was about 110 grams (4 ounces) of silver (see verse 9.4). A year is literally “for the days,” which is an idiomatic expression meaning “each year.” It may be rendered “per year” ( NET Bible) or “Every year” (Contemporary English Version). The mention of silver brings to mind the episode between Micah and his mother, but also Delilah and the Philistines who offer her silver to betray Samson. Indeed, the next words referring to “a set of clothes” also seem to be a link to the Samson story.
A suit of apparel refers to “a set of clothes” (New Revised Standard Version; compare verse 14.12). In many cultures around the world, it is customary to give one set of new clothes every year to family members. In this case it is possible that Micah is giving priestly vestments, which would be quite expensive.
Your living is literally “that which will keep you alive,” which refers to food. Good News Translation and many other versions say “your food.” Revised English Bible condenses this phrase and the previous one, saying “food and clothes.”
The Hebrew text of this verse concludes with a clause that most commentators think should not be there. The clause is literally “And the Levite went/walked.” Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and Revised English Bible put this clause in a footnote, while New International Version and New American Bible omit it, with no footnote. However, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh keeps it by saying “The Levite went,” and so does Contemporary English Version with “The young man went for a walk.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project gives a {B} rating to this clause. Though it is possible the Hebrew verb here means the Levite agreed to the conditions offered by Micah, translators should probably omit this clause, including it, or not, in a footnote.
Translation models for this verse are:
• “Stay here with me,” Micah said. “Be my father and my priest. If you do, every year I will pay you ten silver coins, and give you your food and a set of clothes.”
• So Micah invited the Levite to stay with him to be his father and his priest. He promised to pay him ten pieces of silver per year, as well as to provide him with his food and a set of clothes.
Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.