In a delightful interview granted to Reform Judaism magazine, Tamara Cohn Eskenazi, HUC-JIR Professor of Bible, makes an acute observation in which it becomes evident that NRSV messes up badly in its translation of Genesis 3:16-17:
Please give us an
example of a biblical portion whose translation has had profound gender
implications.
Take the story about the first woman and man. The best-known and oldest English translation of the Bible, the King James Version of 1611, translated Genesis 3:16–17 accurately: “Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children...” (Genesis 3:16). “And unto Adam he said...cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it...” (Genesis 3:17). Later translations, however, intensified the hardship of the woman while toning down that of the man. Thus the New Revised Standard Version translation (1989) reads: “To the woman he said, ‘I will greatly increase your pangs in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children,...’ And to the man he said, ‘...cursed is the ground because of you; in toil you shall eat of it....’” Using the words “pangs” and “pain” gives the impression that woman is meant to suffer, while translating the very same Hebrew word as “toil” when it comes to the man gives the impression that the man only has to work hard. Our commentary makes it clear that God’s pronouncements hold the woman and man equally responsible.
“Our commentary” is The
Torah: A Women’s Commentary (URJ Press), of which Tamara Cohn Eskenazi is editor.
The multi-authored work is due out in
December of this year. At last year's SBL Annual Meeting, a sample page was handed out. I look forward to its publication.
In my next post, I
will look at these verses in more detail.
Hi,
There is an argument to suggest that man is doubly more culpable than woman over the fall.
1. He was the one to whom God specifically commanded re the "tree of knowledge" so it seems. Eve probably heard it from Adam, not God directly. So his sense of duty and responsibility to God should surely have been heightened due to his role in the whole affair.
2. He failed in his first duty - to protect the garden from wild animals. Eve would never have been in that predicament if it wasn't for Adam.
How Eve handled that whole matter is food for a more considered post after I have read your "more detailed" analysis of these verses.
Blessings.
Martin
http://hansellfamily.homeip.net
Posted by: Martin Hansell | October 06, 2007 at 08:52 AM