2023考研英語(yǔ)閱讀理性的聲音

　　Voice ofreason

　　理性的聲音

　　The Story of the Scrolls: The Miraculous Discovery and True Significance of the Dead SeaScrolls. By Geza Vermes.

　　《古卷的故事：死海古卷的神奇發(fā)現(xiàn)和真正意義》。格左維爾麥希著。

　　Within a century or so of Christianity s emergence, Jews and Christians were having heateddisputes over certain prophetic passages in the Hebrew scriptures. They were arguing notonly over the meaning of those verses, but over their precise wording. Each side suspectedthe other of doctoring manuscripts in order to support its own interpretations.

　　在基督教出現(xiàn)后一個(gè)世紀(jì)左右的時(shí)間里，猶太教徒和基督徒們就希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)中某些預(yù)言性的章節(jié)進(jìn)行了激烈的辯論。他們不僅就那些經(jīng)節(jié)的意思，也就那些經(jīng)節(jié)準(zhǔn)確的字詞進(jìn)行爭(zhēng)論。每一方都懷疑對(duì)方篡改了手稿以便支持自己的闡釋。

　　At least until the late 20th century, it was almost impossible for modern scholars to throwany light on the substance of these disputes: in other words, to say which party was correctin its claims as to which wording was the oldest. There are clearly some small but significantdifferences between the Hebrew used by most Jews for at least 1,400 years or sotheMasoretic textand the Septuagint, a translation into Greek made for Hellenistic Jews inEgypt about 800 years earlier, using a Hebrew original which has been lost. But nobodycould really explain the source of these differences. Was it the case that the translatorsdeliberately set out to mislead, or did later editors alter the Hebrew?

　　至少在二十世紀(jì)晚期以前，現(xiàn)代的學(xué)者們幾乎不可能弄清這些爭(zhēng)論的實(shí)質(zhì)內(nèi)容：換句話(huà)說(shuō)，幾乎不可能斷定哪一方對(duì)于哪一個(gè)用詞最為古老的看法是否正確。大部分猶太人使用了至少1400年左右的希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)即馬所拉本圣經(jīng)和七十士希臘文圣經(jīng)之間顯然有一些細(xì)微但重要的不同之處。但沒(méi)人真能解釋這些不同之處的來(lái)源。是翻譯者們有意去誤導(dǎo)讀者，還是后來(lái)的編輯者改動(dòng)了希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)?

　　Debate about this and many other delicate matters was transformed by the discovery,starting in 1947, of nearly 900 documents, in a series of caves in the desolate landscapeeast of Jerusalem. The scrolls, the first of which was found by a young goatherd, are amixture of biblical and quasi-biblical texts, plus some previously unknown writings, allapparently possessed by a dissident Jewish community justbefore and during the time of Jesus Christ.

　　關(guān)于這一點(diǎn)和其它許多微妙問(wèn)題的爭(zhēng)論因?yàn)閷⒔?00份文件從 1947年開(kāi)始陸續(xù)被發(fā)現(xiàn)而改觀。發(fā)現(xiàn)這些文件的地點(diǎn)是位于耶路撒冷以東荒涼地帶的一組巖洞。最先發(fā)現(xiàn)其中一冊(cè)古卷的是一個(gè)年輕的羊倌。古卷中既有圣經(jīng)上的文本也有類(lèi)似圣經(jīng)的文本，還有一些先前不為人所知的著作;這些卷冊(cè)顯然是由一個(gè)持異見(jiàn)的猶太人群體擁有，擁有的年代略早于并貫穿耶穌基督的時(shí)代。

　　The analysis of such ultra-sensitive material requires calm judgmentand Geza Vermes,a retired Oxford professor, is widely credited with having the coolest head among the scholarswho have devoted their careers to studying the scrolls and sharing their insights. Some of hiswriting is controversial. He has, for example, strong personal opinions on the historicalJesus, and like anybody who enters that field he has attracted both admirers and detractors.But in this short personal memoir, he sticks mainly to the known facts about the scrolls, andthe arguments they have caused. On this matter, he is careful and fair-minded.

　　分析這樣極度敏感的材料需要心平氣和的判斷而在專(zhuān)事研究死海古卷并與他人分享見(jiàn)解的學(xué)者中，格左維爾麥希這位牛津大學(xué)的退休教授被廣泛的認(rèn)為是頭腦最為冷靜的一位。他所寫(xiě)的文字有的也具爭(zhēng)議性。比如，他對(duì)歷史上的耶穌持有強(qiáng)烈的個(gè)人觀點(diǎn);和其他任何進(jìn)入該領(lǐng)域的人一樣，他也吸引了崇拜者和詆毀他的人。但在這本短小的個(gè)人回憶錄中，他基本上只講述了關(guān)于那些古卷已知的事實(shí)和古卷所引起的爭(zhēng)論。在這件事上，他小心謹(jǐn)慎，公平持正。

　　It may help that his personal story stands at the tragic interface between Christianity andJudaism in the 20th century. As the 85-year-old Mr Vermes recalls, his Hungarian Jewishparents died in the Holocaust, even though the family, which was not religious, had convertedto Catholicism in the 1930s. Young Geza was saved by the family s Catholic contacts and wenton to study in western Europe. Ordained as a Catholic priest and educated at Catholicuniversities, he later reverted to his Jewish roots. As a lifelong analyst of the scrolls, whoseefforts to maximise scholarly access have been gratefully recalled by younger biblicalscholars, such as Britain s Philip Davies, Mr Vermes is well placed to dissect the precisesignificance of this unique discovery, and to assess the many theories it triggered.

　　他親身經(jīng)歷了基督教和猶太教在二十世紀(jì)悲劇性的關(guān)系，這可能對(duì)他有所助益。現(xiàn)已85歲的維爾麥希回憶說(shuō)，他匈牙利裔的猶太雙親都死于大屠殺，雖然他們一家他們并不篤信宗教之前在一九三十年代都皈依了天主教。年輕的格左被其家庭交往的天主教徒所救，接著去了西歐學(xué)習(xí)。他被授予了天主教神父的職務(wù)，也在不同的天主教大學(xué)受過(guò)教育，但后來(lái)他還是回歸了他的猶太傳統(tǒng)。作為一位畢生分析死海古卷的專(zhuān)家，他努力讓盡可能多的學(xué)者能夠接觸這些文本比他年輕的圣經(jīng)學(xué)者們回憶起他的這些努力時(shí)都心存感激 由他來(lái)剖析這一獨(dú)特發(fā)現(xiàn)的精確意義和評(píng)價(jià)這一發(fā)現(xiàn)所引發(fā)的多個(gè)理論非常合適。

　　One popular conspiracy theory held that the Catholic scholars who did the initial analysisof the scrolls kept their conclusion secret because it challenged the Christian faith. MrVermes, who was close to that research effort, finds good reason to criticise it for slownessand carelessnessbut no ground to assert a conspiracy. Nor does he acceptoversimplified theories that directly link the community which gave rise to the scrolls withthe advent of Christianity. The manuscripts are relevant to the study of Christian beginnings,but they are not the whole story.

　　根據(jù)一個(gè)流傳甚廣的陰謀論的說(shuō)法，對(duì)死海古卷進(jìn)行了最初分析的天主教學(xué)者們對(duì)他們的結(jié)論秘而不宣，因?yàn)樵摻Y(jié)論挑戰(zhàn)了基督教的信仰。維爾麥希先生對(duì)于那次研究有近距離的了解，他有理有據(jù)的對(duì)該次研究的緩慢和粗疏做了批評(píng)，但他不認(rèn)為陰謀論的說(shuō)法有根據(jù)。他也不接受那些把留下了死海古卷的群體和基督教的出現(xiàn)直接聯(lián)系起來(lái)的過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單化的理論。那些手稿對(duì)關(guān)于基督教起源的研究有用，但它們并非事情的全部。

　　For Mr Vermes, the Dead Sea scrolls provide both reassurance and difficult questions forbelieving Christians and Jews alike. The reassuring news for Jews is that the scrolls,comprising versions of the Hebrew scriptures in use about 2,000 years ago, are mostly prettyclose to the later Masoretic version.

　　在維爾麥希先生看來(lái)，死海古卷對(duì)于虔信的基督徒和猶太教徒來(lái)說(shuō)，都是既安頓了他們的信心，也提出了不易回答的問(wèn)題。讓猶太教徒安心的消息是這些古卷包含了大約兩千年前人們所用的不同版本的希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)，而這些版本和后來(lái)的馬所拉本圣經(jīng)大體上相當(dāng)接近。

　　Although Mr Vermes does not spell this out in detail, there is also some intriguing news forChristians: certain Old Testament passages which they hold dearbut which aremysteriously absent in the Masoretic versiondo feature in the scrolls. They don t seem tohave been late Christian inventions. The challenging thing for both faiths to accept is thatmultiple versions of the Hebrew scriptures appear to have been in circulation for a verylong timeto a degree that casts doubt on the existence of one original set of words.Indeed, the very idea there was a single Ur-text from which later versions diverge eithermore or less is hardly tenable, as Mr Vermes persuasively argues.

　　雖然維爾麥希先生沒(méi)有細(xì)說(shuō)，關(guān)于死海古卷也有對(duì)基督徒來(lái)說(shuō)頗有意思的消息：舊約中某些他們珍視的段落但是這些段落卻神秘的沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)在馬所拉本圣經(jīng)中確實(shí)在死海古卷中就有了。它們看上去不像是基督徒后來(lái)編造的。上述兩個(gè)宗教可能都難以接受的是希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)的多個(gè)版本看來(lái)都已經(jīng)流傳了很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間，以致于讓人懷疑是否真的存在一個(gè)原初的文本。其實(shí)，就如維爾麥希先生讓人信服的論證的那樣，認(rèn)為先有一個(gè)單一的原始文本，后來(lái)的版本或多或少的脫離了該個(gè)原始文本的這一想法是難以站住腳的。

　　Many believers in revealed religion, especially those who regard text as the primarymedium of revelation, will find that hard. But if they do accept it, it will be much easier forbelievers in different religions to have civilised debates without coming to blows. As someonewho has significantly advanced that cause, Mr Vermes can look back on a life well lived.

　　許多相信啟示宗教的人們，尤其是那些把文字視為啟示之主要媒介的信徒，會(huì)覺(jué)得這難以接受。但是如果他們真的接受了這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)，不同宗教的信徒間將更容易進(jìn)行文明的爭(zhēng)論而不用彼此揮拳相向。作為有力的推動(dòng)了這一事業(yè)的人，維爾麥希先生的生命沒(méi)有虛度。

　　Voice ofreason

　　理性的聲音

　　The Story of the Scrolls: The Miraculous Discovery and True Significance of the Dead SeaScrolls. By Geza Vermes.

　　《古卷的故事：死海古卷的神奇發(fā)現(xiàn)和真正意義》。格左維爾麥希著。

　　Within a century or so of Christianity s emergence, Jews and Christians were having heateddisputes over certain prophetic passages in the Hebrew scriptures. They were arguing notonly over the meaning of those verses, but over their precise wording. Each side suspectedthe other of doctoring manuscripts in order to support its own interpretations.

　　在基督教出現(xiàn)后一個(gè)世紀(jì)左右的時(shí)間里，猶太教徒和基督徒們就希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)中某些預(yù)言性的章節(jié)進(jìn)行了激烈的辯論。他們不僅就那些經(jīng)節(jié)的意思，也就那些經(jīng)節(jié)準(zhǔn)確的字詞進(jìn)行爭(zhēng)論。每一方都懷疑對(duì)方篡改了手稿以便支持自己的闡釋。

　　At least until the late 20th century, it was almost impossible for modern scholars to throwany light on the substance of these disputes: in other words, to say which party was correctin its claims as to which wording was the oldest. There are clearly some small but significantdifferences between the Hebrew used by most Jews for at least 1,400 years or sotheMasoretic textand the Septuagint, a translation into Greek made for Hellenistic Jews inEgypt about 800 years earlier, using a Hebrew original which has been lost. But nobodycould really explain the source of these differences. Was it the case that the translatorsdeliberately set out to mislead, or did later editors alter the Hebrew?

　　至少在二十世紀(jì)晚期以前，現(xiàn)代的學(xué)者們幾乎不可能弄清這些爭(zhēng)論的實(shí)質(zhì)內(nèi)容：換句話(huà)說(shuō)，幾乎不可能斷定哪一方對(duì)于哪一個(gè)用詞最為古老的看法是否正確。大部分猶太人使用了至少1400年左右的希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)即馬所拉本圣經(jīng)和七十士希臘文圣經(jīng)之間顯然有一些細(xì)微但重要的不同之處。但沒(méi)人真能解釋這些不同之處的來(lái)源。是翻譯者們有意去誤導(dǎo)讀者，還是后來(lái)的編輯者改動(dòng)了希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)?

　　Debate about this and many other delicate matters was transformed by the discovery,starting in 1947, of nearly 900 documents, in a series of caves in the desolate landscapeeast of Jerusalem. The scrolls, the first of which was found by a young goatherd, are amixture of biblical and quasi-biblical texts, plus some previously unknown writings, allapparently possessed by a dissident Jewish community justbefore and during the time of Jesus Christ.

　　關(guān)于這一點(diǎn)和其它許多微妙問(wèn)題的爭(zhēng)論因?yàn)閷⒔?00份文件從 1947年開(kāi)始陸續(xù)被發(fā)現(xiàn)而改觀。發(fā)現(xiàn)這些文件的地點(diǎn)是位于耶路撒冷以東荒涼地帶的一組巖洞。最先發(fā)現(xiàn)其中一冊(cè)古卷的是一個(gè)年輕的羊倌。古卷中既有圣經(jīng)上的文本也有類(lèi)似圣經(jīng)的文本，還有一些先前不為人所知的著作;這些卷冊(cè)顯然是由一個(gè)持異見(jiàn)的猶太人群體擁有，擁有的年代略早于并貫穿耶穌基督的時(shí)代。

　　The analysis of such ultra-sensitive material requires calm judgmentand Geza Vermes,a retired Oxford professor, is widely credited with having the coolest head among the scholarswho have devoted their careers to studying the scrolls and sharing their insights. Some of hiswriting is controversial. He has, for example, strong personal opinions on the historicalJesus, and like anybody who enters that field he has attracted both admirers and detractors.But in this short personal memoir, he sticks mainly to the known facts about the scrolls, andthe arguments they have caused. On this matter, he is careful and fair-minded.

　　分析這樣極度敏感的材料需要心平氣和的判斷而在專(zhuān)事研究死海古卷并與他人分享見(jiàn)解的學(xué)者中，格左維爾麥希這位牛津大學(xué)的退休教授被廣泛的認(rèn)為是頭腦最為冷靜的一位。他所寫(xiě)的文字有的也具爭(zhēng)議性。比如，他對(duì)歷史上的耶穌持有強(qiáng)烈的個(gè)人觀點(diǎn);和其他任何進(jìn)入該領(lǐng)域的人一樣，他也吸引了崇拜者和詆毀他的人。但在這本短小的個(gè)人回憶錄中，他基本上只講述了關(guān)于那些古卷已知的事實(shí)和古卷所引起的爭(zhēng)論。在這件事上，他小心謹(jǐn)慎，公平持正。

　　It may help that his personal story stands at the tragic interface between Christianity andJudaism in the 20th century. As the 85-year-old Mr Vermes recalls, his Hungarian Jewishparents died in the Holocaust, even though the family, which was not religious, had convertedto Catholicism in the 1930s. Young Geza was saved by the family s Catholic contacts and wenton to study in western Europe. Ordained as a Catholic priest and educated at Catholicuniversities, he later reverted to his Jewish roots. As a lifelong analyst of the scrolls, whoseefforts to maximise scholarly access have been gratefully recalled by younger biblicalscholars, such as Britain s Philip Davies, Mr Vermes is well placed to dissect the precisesignificance of this unique discovery, and to assess the many theories it triggered.

　　他親身經(jīng)歷了基督教和猶太教在二十世紀(jì)悲劇性的關(guān)系，這可能對(duì)他有所助益。現(xiàn)已85歲的維爾麥希回憶說(shuō)，他匈牙利裔的猶太雙親都死于大屠殺，雖然他們一家他們并不篤信宗教之前在一九三十年代都皈依了天主教。年輕的格左被其家庭交往的天主教徒所救，接著去了西歐學(xué)習(xí)。他被授予了天主教神父的職務(wù)，也在不同的天主教大學(xué)受過(guò)教育，但后來(lái)他還是回歸了他的猶太傳統(tǒng)。作為一位畢生分析死海古卷的專(zhuān)家，他努力讓盡可能多的學(xué)者能夠接觸這些文本比他年輕的圣經(jīng)學(xué)者們回憶起他的這些努力時(shí)都心存感激 由他來(lái)剖析這一獨(dú)特發(fā)現(xiàn)的精確意義和評(píng)價(jià)這一發(fā)現(xiàn)所引發(fā)的多個(gè)理論非常合適。

　　One popular conspiracy theory held that the Catholic scholars who did the initial analysisof the scrolls kept their conclusion secret because it challenged the Christian faith. MrVermes, who was close to that research effort, finds good reason to criticise it for slownessand carelessnessbut no ground to assert a conspiracy. Nor does he acceptoversimplified theories that directly link the community which gave rise to the scrolls withthe advent of Christianity. The manuscripts are relevant to the study of Christian beginnings,but they are not the whole story.

　　根據(jù)一個(gè)流傳甚廣的陰謀論的說(shuō)法，對(duì)死海古卷進(jìn)行了最初分析的天主教學(xué)者們對(duì)他們的結(jié)論秘而不宣，因?yàn)樵摻Y(jié)論挑戰(zhàn)了基督教的信仰。維爾麥希先生對(duì)于那次研究有近距離的了解，他有理有據(jù)的對(duì)該次研究的緩慢和粗疏做了批評(píng)，但他不認(rèn)為陰謀論的說(shuō)法有根據(jù)。他也不接受那些把留下了死海古卷的群體和基督教的出現(xiàn)直接聯(lián)系起來(lái)的過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)單化的理論。那些手稿對(duì)關(guān)于基督教起源的研究有用，但它們并非事情的全部。

　　For Mr Vermes, the Dead Sea scrolls provide both reassurance and difficult questions forbelieving Christians and Jews alike. The reassuring news for Jews is that the scrolls,comprising versions of the Hebrew scriptures in use about 2,000 years ago, are mostly prettyclose to the later Masoretic version.

　　在維爾麥希先生看來(lái)，死海古卷對(duì)于虔信的基督徒和猶太教徒來(lái)說(shuō)，都是既安頓了他們的信心，也提出了不易回答的問(wèn)題。讓猶太教徒安心的消息是這些古卷包含了大約兩千年前人們所用的不同版本的希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)，而這些版本和后來(lái)的馬所拉本圣經(jīng)大體上相當(dāng)接近。

　　Although Mr Vermes does not spell this out in detail, there is also some intriguing news forChristians: certain Old Testament passages which they hold dearbut which aremysteriously absent in the Masoretic versiondo feature in the scrolls. They don t seem tohave been late Christian inventions. The challenging thing for both faiths to accept is thatmultiple versions of the Hebrew scriptures appear to have been in circulation for a verylong timeto a degree that casts doubt on the existence of one original set of words.Indeed, the very idea there was a single Ur-text from which later versions diverge eithermore or less is hardly tenable, as Mr Vermes persuasively argues.

　　雖然維爾麥希先生沒(méi)有細(xì)說(shuō)，關(guān)于死海古卷也有對(duì)基督徒來(lái)說(shuō)頗有意思的消息：舊約中某些他們珍視的段落但是這些段落卻神秘的沒(méi)有出現(xiàn)在馬所拉本圣經(jīng)中確實(shí)在死海古卷中就有了。它們看上去不像是基督徒后來(lái)編造的。上述兩個(gè)宗教可能都難以接受的是希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)圣經(jīng)的多個(gè)版本看來(lái)都已經(jīng)流傳了很長(zhǎng)時(shí)間，以致于讓人懷疑是否真的存在一個(gè)原初的文本。其實(shí)，就如維爾麥希先生讓人信服的論證的那樣，認(rèn)為先有一個(gè)單一的原始文本，后來(lái)的版本或多或少的脫離了該個(gè)原始文本的這一想法是難以站住腳的。

　　Many believers in revealed religion, especially those who regard text as the primarymedium of revelation, will find that hard. But if they do accept it, it will be much easier forbelievers in different religions to have civilised debates without coming to blows. As someonewho has significantly advanced that cause, Mr Vermes can look back on a life well lived.

　　許多相信啟示宗教的人們，尤其是那些把文字視為啟示之主要媒介的信徒，會(huì)覺(jué)得這難以接受。但是如果他們真的接受了這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)，不同宗教的信徒間將更容易進(jìn)行文明的爭(zhēng)論而不用彼此揮拳相向。作為有力的推動(dòng)了這一事業(yè)的人，維爾麥希先生的生命沒(méi)有虛度。