ERKEN DÖNEM YAHUDİ KAYNAKLARINA GÖRE TANAH’IN KANONİZE EDİLMESİ

Yıl 2015, , 25 - 48, 15.12.2015

Eldar Hasanoğlu

https://doi.org/10.17335/sakaifd.219916

Cited By: 1

Öz

Yahudi  kutsal  kitabı  Tanah’ın  standart  metin  haline  getirilmesi  süreç  içerisinde  gerçekleşmiştir. Erken dönem Yahudi kaynaklarında Tanah’ın içeriğiyle ilgili farklı görüşler geçmektedir. Yahudilikte kanon meselesi asırlar boyunca tartışma konusu olmamıştır. XIX. yüzyıldan itibaren kanonizasyonun ne zaman gerçekleştiği konusunda farklı görüşler dile getirilmiştir. Bir kitabın kanonik  listeye  alınması  sırasında  rabbiler  tarafından  dile  getirilen  söylemlerde  dinî,  mezhepsel  ve asabiyetçi  kaygıların  hâkim  olduğu  görülmektedir.  Bu  çalışmanın  amacı  erken  dönem  Yahudi kaynaklarda  Tanah’ın  standart  metni  ve  rabbilerin  kanon  algısı  meselelerini  tanıtmak,  XIX -XX. yüzyıla ait kanonizasyonla ilgili görüşleri sunmaktır. Sonuç kısmında kanonizasyonla ilgili kanaatimiz beyan edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tanah, Kanonizasyon, Rabbani Kaynaklar, Yavne Toplantısı

The Canonization of Tanach According to the Early Jewish Sources

Öz

Standardized text of theTanach, Jewish sacred book, is a result of process. Early Jewish sources contains different information about the content of the Tanach. The issue of the canonic text in Judaism was left out through centuries. By the 19th century, different views were put

forward about the date of canonization. Rabbinical discourses indicate that religious, sectarian and nationalist interests were dominantly taken into account in the process of canonization of a book. This article aims: to introduce the issues of standard text of the

Tanach in early Jewish sources and rabbinic perception of canon, to give the views about the the Synod of Jamnia and cononization from 19-20th century and submitting a hypothesis about the Synod of Jamnia.

Anahtar Kelimeler

anach, Canonizatio n, Rabbinic Sources, the Synod of Jamnia

Kaynakça

• Adam, Baki, Yahudi Kaynaklarına Göre Tevrat, İstanbul: Pınar Yay., 2001.
• Alexander, Philip S., “The Parting of the Ways From the Perspective of Rabbinic Judaism”, Jews and Christians: The Parting of the Ways A.D. 70 to 135, ed. James D.G. Dunn, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992, 1-26.
• Alon, Gedalyahu, Toldot ha-Yehudim be-eretz Yisrael be-tkufat ha-Mişna ve ha-Talmud, Bney Barak: Hotzaat ha-Kibutz ha-Meuhad, 1989, I.
• Aune, D.E., “On the Origins of the Council of Javneh Myth”, Journal of Biblical Litera- ture, 110: 3 (1991), 491-493.
• Bade, W. Frederic, “The Canonization of the Old Testament”, The Biblical World, 37: 3 (1911), 151-162.
• Beckwith, Roger T., The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and its Background in Early Judaism, London: SPCK, 1985.
• “Ben La’anah”, Jewish Encyclopedia, http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2880-ben- la-anah, (03.10.2014)
• Broyde, Michael, “Defilement of the Hands, Canonization of the Bible, and the Spe- cial Status of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs”, Judaism: a Quarterly Jo- urnal (http://www.thefreelibrary.com) (03.10.2014). Life and Thought, 44: 1 (1995), 65-79
• Buhl, Frants, Kanon und Text des Alten Testamentes, Leipzig: Akademische Buchhand- lung, 1891.
• Chapman, Stephen B., “Canon: Old Testament” The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible, ed. Michael D. Coogan, New York: Oxford UP, 96-109.
• Chapman, Stephen, “The Canon Debate: What It Is and Why It Matters”, Journal of Theological Interpretation, 4: 2 (2010), 273-294.
• Charles, R.H. The Apocrypha and the Pseudepygrapha of the Old Testament I-II, Oxford: Clarendon, 1913.
• Childs, Brevard S., Biblical Theology of the Old and New Testaments, Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1992.
• Christie, W.M., “The Jamnia Period in Jewish History”, The Journal of Theological Stu- dies, 26:104 (1925), 347-364.
• Collins, John J., Seers, Sibyls, and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, Brill, 2001.
• Complete works of Josephus, tr. Syvert Havercamp, New York: Bigelow-Brown&Co., 1844, vol. IV.
• Cross, Frank Moore, From Epic to Canon: History and Literature in Ancient Israel, Balti- more: The John Hopkins UP, 2000.
• Dunbar, David, “The Biblical Canon”, Hermeneutics Authority and Canon, ed. D.A. Carson, J. Woodbridge, Eugene: Wipf&Stock Publishers, 2005.
• Religion, 8 (1979), 135-142.
• Maori, Yeshayahu, “Rabbinic Midrash as Evidence for Textual Variants in the Heb- rew Bible: History and Practice”, Modern Scholarship in the Study of Torah: Cont- ributions and Limitation, ed. Shalom Carmy, Lanham: Jason Aronson, 2005, 101-130.
• McDonald, Lee M., “Primary Sources for the Study of the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible Canon”, The Canon Debate: on the Origins and Formation of the Bible, ed. L.M. McDonald, J.A. Sanders, Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002, 580-582.
• Mellor, Enid B., “What Books Belong to the Old Testament”, The Making of the Old Testament, ed. Enid B. Mellor, New York: Cambridge UP, 2008, 105-131.
• Newman, Robert C., “The Council of Jamnia and the Old Testament Canon”, West- minster Theological Journal, 38:4 (1976), 319-349.
• Newman, Willis C., Old Testament Survey in Outline Form, Tacoma: Newman Interna- tional, 2009.
• Oppenheimer, A’hron, “Terumot and Ma’aserot”, Encyclopaedia Judaica2, XIX, 652-654.
• Russel, David S., The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, Philadelphia: West- minster, 1964.
• Ryle, Herbert E., The Canon of the Old Testament, LondonNew York: MacMillan, 1892.
• Segal, M.H., “The Promulgation of the Authoritative Text of the Hebrew Bible”, Journal of Biblical Studies, 72:1 (1953), 35-47.
• Segal, Moşe Tzevi, Mavo ha-Mikra, Yeruşalayim: Kiryat Sefer, 1967, IV.
• Spinoza, Benedict De, Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, tr. R.H.M. Elwes, London/New York: Routledge, 1966.
• Stone, Timothy J., The Compilational History of the Megilloth, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013.
• Talmud Yeruşalmi, www.mechon-mamre.com
• The Babylonian Talmud, ed. Rabbi Epstein, London: The Soncino Press, 1978.
• The Mishnah, tr. Danby, Herbert, Oxford UP, 1933.
• The original Hebrew of a Portion of Ecclesiasticus, ed. A.E. Cowley, A. Neubauer, Oxford: Clarendon, trhsz., xix-xxvii.
• The works of Philo Judaeus, tr. C.D. Yonge, London: ?, 1855, vol. VI.
• Thiessen, Clarence H., Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edermans Publishing, 2003.
• Tosefta, www.mechon-mamre.com
• Van der Toorn, Karel, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible, Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2007.
• Vermes, Geza, Ölü Deniz Parşömenleri: Kumran Yazıtları, trc. Nilüfer Çelebioğlu, İs- tanbul: Nokta Kitap, 2005.l
• Veysman, Zeev, Mavo le-Mikra, Tel Aviv: ha-Universita ha-Petuha, 1990.
• Wildeboer, Gerrit, The Origin of the Canon of the Old Testament, tr. B.W. Bacon, Lon- don: LuzacCo, 1895.
• Wolfenson, Louis B., “Implications on the Place of the Book of Ruth in Editions, Ma- nuscripts, and Canon of the Old Testament”, HUCA, (1924), 151-178.
• Zeitlin, Solomon, “An Historical Study of the Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptu- res”, PAAJR, III, (1931-1932), 121-158.
• Zeitlin, Solomon, “Jewish Apocryphal Literature”, The Jewish Quarterly Review, 40: 3 (1950), 223-250.