Is there a problem with JPS?

Question

JPS is the 1917 translation of Tanakh from the Jewish Publication Society, NJPS (New JPS) is the 1985 renewed edition to "reflect contemporary scholarship."

The NJPS has the best English translation I've seen. Is there any halakhic problem with using/preferring a translation done by non-observant people?

I had to buy the JPS Study Bible for college, which was loaded with anti-Jewish/religious commentary, but have assumed there was no problem just using the direct translation.

Is there any halakhah that takes issue with translators of holy text?

Could someone explain What are the "NJPS Tanakh" and "JPS" ? — , Sep 05 '12 at 15:43
Why should there be a problem with using (just) the translation, which you already believe is a good one? Sure, if you can't evaluate the quality of the translation yourself and suspect a hidden agenda, you should be careful. But JPS seems to be pretty reputable, so I infer that that's not your concern. — Monica Cellio, Sep 05 '12 at 15:43
@danie7LT: JPS is the 1917 translation from the Jewish Publication Society, NJPS is the 1985 renewed edition to "reflect contemporary scholarship." — Aryeh, Sep 05 '12 at 15:50
@ Monica Cellio: The plethora of halakhot regarding Torah study and that scribes are taught to "be careful with your task, for it is sacred work; if you add or subtract a single letter, you destry everything," makes me wonder the parameters of Torah translation. If a scribe is required to be completely observant in writing a sefer Torah for public use, shouldn't a translator also? — Aryeh, Sep 05 '12 at 15:54
Aryeh, that explanation of the abbreviations should be in the question for clarity's sake. — msh210, Sep 05 '12 at 15:55
@Aryeh, ok, I can see that. I would expect the situation to be different for a translation -- which you know, by its being a translation, is not the original text -- than for a sofer writing a sefer torah that everyone will assume is accurate. But I don't know. — Monica Cellio, Sep 05 '12 at 15:59
Is your question about JPS in particular or non-religious translations in general? If the latter, please consider adjusting your title. — Double AA, Sep 05 '12 at 16:37
@Double AA: The introduction to the JPS Study Bible explains their translation under the editorship of "Conservative, Reform, and Orthodox branches" and heavily promote Documentary Hypothesis in their methodology. I am referring to JPS in particular. — Aryeh, Sep 05 '12 at 17:50
@Aryeh In their methodology of translation or of commentary? — Double AA, Sep 05 '12 at 17:51
@Double AA: I'll have to find the book to answer you, but you might be right. The JPS website mentions that the translation "drew upon the findings of history and science" but doesn't say much more than that. Maybe another question should be posed with your suggestion of non-religious translations, or furthermore, studying from a Christian-translated bible. — Aryeh, Sep 06 '12 at 08:47

score 3 · Accepted Answer · edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:41

3

"Is there any halakhah that takes issue with translators of holy text?"

Yes and No. The gemorah very strongly supports the translation of Onkelos, while very strongly being negative about the translation into Greek (Septuagint), calling it the worst day in Jewish History.

On the other hand, the Talmud mentions miracles regarding the translation of the Torah into Greek, such as not translating "let us make man" in the plural. A Jewish view of translations in general regarding Tanach and the Humash specifically might make for a great follow up question.

That being said, today I do not know of any halachot that are followed regarding translations. Many yeshivot and rabbis have copies of the NJPS in their libraries. How well the translations are respected will depend on the circles you find yourself in, and certainly if you are looking to study the text in depth and it's nuance, you should look at multiple translations to be certain that they all lead you to the insight you are noticing.

edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:41

Community

1

answered Sep 05 '12 at 17:34

avi

18,985
1
52
81

1

Regarding halachah of translations, see this thread. I believe that the halachah is that (ancient) Greek (but no other translation) can be used for a sefer Torah. (However mezuzot and tefilin can only be in Hebrew.) Note also that the ancient Greek that can be used is usually considered a lost language. (See here.) – Ted Hopp Sep 05 '12 at 17:54
Thanks Avi and Ted Hopp, that was very helpful. Unless someone proves otherwise, it seems Jewish translation of Tanakh is void of halakhic parameters. I would have expected something in light of the rigorous requirements of kosher scribes, but perhaps since translated works don't have the kedusha of a sefer Torah, all that is required is good judgment. – Aryeh Sep 06 '12 at 08:07
Onkelos's is not a translation, it's a targum. – barlop Jun 10 '20 at 14:08
@barlop Targum translates to translation. There is no difference. – avi Jun 10 '20 at 15:29
@avi I told you targum is not translation, it often paraphrases at best. A paraphrase is clearly not a translation. This is basic logic and basic knowledge of English, shows you it's not a translation. https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/stewart_don/faq/bible-translations/question2-what-is-a-paraphrase.cfm Some though will speak of literal translation vs dynamic translation https://www.tyndale.com/stories/literal-translation-vs-paraphrase-of-the-bible – barlop Jun 10 '20 at 15:57
@barlop https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=iw&text=translation – avi Jun 10 '20 at 17:11
@avi dictionaries are fairly basic, for example by that definition you could translate beraishit to "coco pops". If you look at your google translate link here https://translate.google.com/#view=home&op=translate&sl=en&tl=iw&text=translating it describes translating - and says expressing the meaning (so that helps you a bit), and then it actually translates targum as translate/construe. If you know English well, you'd know that translate and construe are far from equivalent words in the English language! – barlop Jun 14 '20 at 18:37
In a different context, targum means construe, but not in this context. All translations are interpretations. There is nothing fancy about "targum". And no, you can't translate Bereshit to "coco pops". But you do you. – avi Jun 15 '20 at 06:11

score 1 · Answer 2 · answered Sep 05 '12 at 13:14

1

What enters in our mind should be as important as what enters in our mouth. In the same way we eat kosher, it seems to me we should read only "kosher" translations, especially when it comes to Holy Writings. I am not sure this is a halakhic question (that is the difference with food), but it seems so important that I would never read something translated by a non observant person.

answered Sep 05 '12 at 13:14

Dovid

19
1

1

In my heart I feel the same, but when it comes to food treif is treif and kosher is kosher. The question is whether there is any halakhic basis to forbid learning from such translations. – Aryeh Sep 05 '12 at 14:58
1

Dovid, 'never' seems a little strong considering you without a doubt have read countless things written and translated by non-observant people (especially if you vary your definition of non-observant). – Double AA Sep 05 '12 at 16:14
If you really think it is comparable to food, then why stop at translations? You shouldn't be reading math or spelling textbooks written by non-observant people either. – Dov F Sep 05 '12 at 17:34

Is there a problem with JPS?

2 Answers2