PREFACE

The sacred task of translating the Word of God, as revealed to Israel

through lawgiver, prophet, psalmist, and sage, began at an early date.
According to an ancient rabbinic interpretation, Joshua had the Torah
engraved upon the stones of the altar (Joshua 8:32) not in the
original Hebrew alone, but in all the languages of mankind, which were
held to be seventy, in order that all men might become acquainted with
the words of the Scriptures. This statement, with its universalistic
tendency, is, of course, a reflex of later times, when the Hebrew
Scriptures had become a subject of curiosity and perhaps also of
anxiety to the pagan or semi-pagan world.

While this tradition contains an element of truth, it is certain that

the primary object of translating the Bible was to minister to a need
nearer home. Upon the establishment of the Second Commonwealth under
Ezra and Nehemiah, it became imperative to make the Torah of God
'distinct and giving sense' through the means of interpretation
(Nehemiah 8:8 and 13:24), that the Word of God might be understood by
all the people. The Rabbis perceived in this activity of the first
generation of the Sopherim the origin of the Aramaic translation known
as the Targum, first made orally and afterwards committed to writing,
which was necessitated by the fact that Israel had forgotten the
sacred language, and spoke the idiom current in a large part of
western Asia. All this, however, is veiled in obscurity, as is the
whole inner history of the Jews during the Persian rule.

The historic necessity for translation was repeated with all the great
changes in Israel's career. It is enough to point to the Septuagint,
or the Greek translation of the Scriptures, the product of Israel's
contact with the Hellenistic civilization dominating the world at that
time; to the Arabic translation by the Gaon Saadya, when the great
majority of the Jewish people came under the sceptre of Mohammedan
rulers; and to the German translation by Mendelssohn and his school,
at the dawn of a new epoch, which brought the Jews in Europe, most of
whom spoke a German dialect, into closer contact with their
neighbours. These translations are all historical products intimately
connected with Israel's wanderings among the nations and with the
great events of mankind in general.

Ancient and continuous as this task of translation was, it would be a

mistake to think that there were no misgivings about it. At least it
is certain that opinions were divided as to the desirability of such
undertakings. While Philo and his Alexandrian coreligionists looked
upon the translation of the Seventy as a work of inspired men, the
Palestinian Rabbis subsequently considered the day on which the
Septuagint was completed as one of the most unfortunate in Israel's
history, seeing that the Torah could never be adequately translated.
And there are indications enough that the consequences of such
translations were not all of a desirable nature. However, in view of
the eagerness with which they were undertaken almost in every land and
in every great epoch of the world's history, it is evident that the
people at large approved of such translations, thinking them to be a
heave-offering to the Lord of each newly acquired vernacular adopted
in the course of the ever-changing conditions of history, and in
particular a tribute to the beauty of Japheth dwelling in the
spiritual tents of Israel.

The greatest change in the life of Israel during the last two
generations was his renewed acquaintance with English-speaking
civilization. Out of a handful of immigrants from Central Europe and
the East who saw the shores of the New World, or even of England and
her colonies, we have grown under Providence both in numbers and in
importance, so that we constitute now the greatest section of Israel
living in a single country outside of Russia. We are only following
in the footsteps of our great predecessors when, with the growth of
our numbers, we have applied ourselves to the sacred task of preparing
a new translation of the Bible into the English language, which,
unless all signs fail, is to become the current speech of the majority
of the children of Israel.

The need of such a translation was felt long ago. Mention may here be
made of the work of Isaac Leeser in America, which was both preceded
and followed by two translations produced in England: the one by Dr.
A. Benisch, the other by Dr. Michael Friedlander. The most popular,
however, among these translations was that of Lesser, which was not
only the accepted version in all the synagogues of the United States,
but was also reproduced in England. Its great merit consisted in the
fact that it incorporated all the improvements proposed by the
Mendelssohn School and their successors, whose combined efforts were
included and further developed in the so-called Zunz Bible, which
enjoyed a certain authority among German Jews for several generations.
With the advance of time and the progress made in almost all
departments of Bible study, it was found that Leeser's translation
would bear improvement and recasting.

Steps leading to the preparation of a new translation into the English

language were taken by the Jewish Publication Society of America in
1892. It was intended to secure, if possible, through the
co-operation of scholars in the United States and in Great Britain, a
new translation of each book, and to place it in the hands of an
Editorial Committee, who by correspondence with the translators should
harmonize the results of the work of the individual contributors.
This method was followed until 1901 under the general direction of
Doctor Marcus Jastrow, Editor-in-Chief, with Doctor Kaufman Kohler and
Doctor Frederick de Sola Mendes as the other members of the Editorial
Committee.

(There is given herewith a list of the translations prepared for the Society:

Genesis, Max Landsberg, Rochester, N. Y.

Exodus and Leviticus, L. N. Dembitz (deceased), Louisville, Ky.
Numbers, David Philipson, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Deuteronomy, F. de Sola Mendes, New York.
Joshua, Joseph H. Hertz, London, England.
Judges, Stephen S. Wise, New York.
II Samuel, Bernard Drachman, New York.
Jeremiah, Sabato Morais (deceased), Philadelphia, Pa.
Ezekiel, Henry W. Schneeberger, Baltimore, Md.
Joel, Oscar Cohen (deceased), Mobile, Ala.
Amos, H. Pereira Mendes, Now York.
Obadiah and Jonah, J. Voorsanger (deceased), San Francisco, California.
Micah, Maurice H. Harris, New York.
Nahum, L. Mayer (deceased), Pittsburgh, Pa.
Zephaniah, M. Schlesinger, Albany, N. Y.
Haggai, S. Mendelsohn, Wilmington, N. C.
Malachi, D. Davidson, New York.
Job, Marcus Jastrow (deceased), Philadelphia, Pa.
Ruth, Joseph Krauskopf, Philadelphia, Pa.
Ecclesiastes, Gustav Gottheil (deceased), New York.
Esther, William Rosenau, Baltimore, Md.
I and II Chronicles, M. Mielziner (deceased), Cincinnati, Ohio.)

It became apparent in 1901 that by this procedure the publication of a

translation of the entire Hebrew Bible would be indefinitely delayed,
and accordingly the Book of Psalms, translated by Doctor Kohler and
revised by his colleagues, was given to the press and issued in 1903.
The death of Doctor Jastrow in that year required the formation of a
new committee under the chairmanship of Doctor Solomon Schechter.
This committee, however, soon found that the method adopted was too
complex, and that it was impossible to accomplish by correspondence
the extensive work required.

In 1908 the Jewish Publication Society of America and the Central

Conference of American Rabbis reached an agreement to cooperate in
bringing out the new translation upon a revised plan of having the
entire work done by a Board of Editors instead of endeavoring to
harmonize the translations of individual contributors. As a result of
this understanding the present Board, composed of Doctor Solomon
Schechter, Doctor Cyrus Adler, and Doctor Joseph Jacobs, representing
the Jewish Publication Society of America, and Doctor Kaufman Kohler,
Doctor David Philipson, and Doctor Samuel Schulman, representing the
Central Conference of American Rabbis, was constituted, and by mutual
agreement Professor Max L. Margolis was chosen as the seventh member,
he to be the Editor-in-Chief of the work and Secretary to the
Editorial Board, of which Doctor Cyrus Adler was elected Chairman.
Incidentally the selection thus made resulted in an equal
representation of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America at New
York, of the Hebrew Union College at Cincinnati, and of the Dropsie
College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning at Philadelphia. For one year
Professor Israel Friedlaender acted as a member of the Board in the
stead of Doctor Schechter.

The method employed by the Board was as follows:

In preparing the manuscript for consideration by the Board of Editors,

Professor Margolis took into account the existing English versions,
the standard commentaries, ancient and modern, the translations
already made for the Jewish Publication Society of America, the
divergent renderings from the Revised Version prepared for the Jews of
England, the marginal notes of the Revised Version, and the changes of
the American Committee of Revisers. Due weight was given to the
ancient versions as establishing a tradition of interpretation,
notably the Septuagint and the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and
Theodotion, the Targums, the Peshitta, the Vulgate, and the Arabic
version of Saadya. Talmudic and midrashic allusions and all available
Jewish commentators, both the great medieval authorities, like Rashi,
Kimhi, and Ibn Ezra, and the moderns S. D. Luzzatto, Malbim, and
Ehrlich, as well as all the important non-Jewish commentators, were
consulted. On this basis, a manuscript was prepared by the
Editor-in-Chief and a copy sent to every member of the Board of
Editors. Sixteen meetings, covering a period of seven years and
occupying one hundred and sixty working days, were held, at which the
proposals in this manuscript and many additional suggestions by the
members of the Board were considered. Each point was thoroughly
discussed, and the view of the majority was incorporated into the
manuscript. When the Board was evenly divided, the Chairman cast the
deciding vote. From time to time subcommittees were at work upon
points left open, and their reports, submitted to the Board, were
discussed and voted upon. The proof of the entire work was sent to
each member of the Board for revision, and the new proposals which
were made by one or another were in turn submitted to a vote by
correspondence and to a final vote at the last meeting of the Board,
held in October-November, 1915.

The present translation is the first for which a group of men

representative of Jewish learning among English-speaking Jews assume
joint responsibility, all previous efforts in the English language
having been the work of individual translators. It has a character of
its own. It aims to combine the spirit of Jewish tradition with the
results of biblical scholarship, ancient, medieval, and modern. It
gives to the Jewish world a translation of the Scriptures done by men
imbued with the Jewish consciousness, while the non-Jewish world, it
is hoped, will welcome a translation that presents many passages from
the Jewish traditional point of view.

The repeated efforts by Jews in the field of biblical translation show

their sentiment toward translations prepared by other denominations.
The dominant feature of this sentiment, apart from the thought that
the christological interpretations in non-Jewish translations are out
of place in a Jewish Bible, is and was that the Jew cannot afford to
have his Bible translation prepared for him by others. He cannot have
it as a gift, even as he cannot borrow his soul from others. If a new
country and a new language metamorphose him into a new man, the duty
of this new man is to prepare a new garb and a new method of
expression for what is most sacred and most dear to him.

We are, it is hardly needful to say, deeply grateful for the works of

our non-Jewish predecessors, such as the Authorised Version with its
admirable diction, which can never be surpassed, as well as for the
Revised Version with its ample learning--but they are not ours. The
Editors have not only used these famous English versions, but they
have gone back to the earlier translations of Wycliffe, Tyndale,
Coverdale, the Bishops' Bible, and the Douai Version, which is the
authorised English translation of the Vulgate used by the Roman
Catholics; in a word, upon doubtful points in style, all English
versions have been drawn upon. The renditions of parts of the Hebrew
Scriptures by Lowth and others in the eighteenth century and by Cheyne
and Driver in our own days were likewise consulted.

As to the text and order of the biblical books, the present

translation follows Jewish tradition, the Sacred Scriptures having
come down in a definite compass and in a definite text. They are
separated into three divisions: Law (Torah, Pentateuch), Prophets
(Nebi'im), Writings (Ketubim). Each of these possesses a different
degree of holiness or authority. In the Prophets and the Writings the
order of the books varies in manuscripts or among Jewish authorities;
but there is absolute agreement as to the compass of these two
divisions, and no book is transposed from the one into the other.
Thus Ruth, Lamentations, and Daniel are all placed in the division of
Writings--not among the Prophets, as in non-Jewish versions.

With every step by which each of the three parts was sealed, nothing
to be added or to be taken away, the text was likewise fixed and
thenceforth made the object of zealous watchfulness. Even with regard
to the latest book of our Scriptures, we read its text substantially
in the form in which the great Rabbi Akiba read it, he who said that
the system by which the sacred text was guarded constituted a fence
about the Scriptures. In that system, at first oral and later
committed to writing, the letters were actually counted and lists
made, to the end that no alterations should creep in at the hands of
careless scribes. The first to collect the notes known as Masorah was
Jacob ben Haim Ibn Adonijah, the editor of the second Rabbinic Bible.
In our own day many scholars have been prominent in this field of
labour, chief among whom are Wolf Heidenheim, S. Frensdorff, S. Baer,
and C. D. Ginsburg. We have followed Baer's text (It should be noted
that in the otherwise excellent edition of Baer the word ____ has been
omitted by mistake in Pr 5:20. In Eze 9:9 the Board
deviated from the Baer edition and accepted the reading ____ instead
of ___. In Ps 62:4 the. vocalization of Ben Naphtali was
followed instead of that of Ben Asher usually adopted by Baer.) and
for the parts not edited by him that of Ginsburg. Not only does the
text known as the masoretic represent the text current in the
Synagogue with regard to consonants, but also with regard to its signs
standing for vowels and accents, both of which embody the
interpretation accepted by the Synagogue. While in the scrolls which
are read in the Synagogue the bare consonants are alone permitted,
readers must prepare themselves from copies allowed for private use,
in ancient times written and now printed, which contain the additional
signs for vowels and accents. A translation must naturally follow the
guide of the latter. Moreover, the public reader is bound in certain
cases to substitute mentally other consonants in the place of those
found in the scrolls, in accordance with the marginal annotations in
the copies intended for private use. These variants are taken
traditionally for corrections, and the public reader who persists in
ignoring them forfeits his position. It is true that in the case of
such variations the Jewish commentators of the Middle Ages sought to
elicit a meaning also from the textual reading, and seem here and
there tacitly to give it preference, but all this partakes of the
nature of private judgment, and does not affect the uniform practice
of the public readings in the Synagogue. While as a rule the margin
(Kere) was followed, we have occasionally adopted the consonants of
the text (Ketib), as for instance in Ps 139:16, and 2Ch 24:27 34:9.

A translation destined for the people can follow only one text, and
that must be the traditional. Nevertheless a translator is not a
transcriber of the text. His principal function is to make the Hebrew
intelligible. Faithful though he must be to the Hebrew idiom, he will
nevertheless be forced by the genius of the English language to use
circumlocution, to add a word or two, to alter the sequence of words,
and the like. In general, our rule has been that, where the word or
words added are implied in the Hebrew construction, no device is used
to mark the addition; where, on the other hand, the addition is not at
once to be inferred from the original wording and yet seems necessary
for the understanding, it has been enclosed in brackets. Naturally
opinion will differ as to what may be deemed an addition warranted by
the Hebrew construction and what may not, but as intelligibility was
the principal aim, the Editors have felt justified in making their
additions, sparingly it is true, but nevertheless as often as the
occasion required.

We have thought it proper to limit the margin to the shortest compass,

confining it to such elucidation of and references to the literal
meaning as are absolutely necessary for making the translation
intelligible. The Rabbis enumerate eighteen instances in which the
scribes consciously altered the text. We have called attention to a
change of this nature in Jud 18:30.

Personal pronouns referring to the Deity have been capitalized. As an

aid to clearness direct discourse has been indicated by quotation
marks. In the prophetical writings, where the speech of the prophet
imperceptibly glides into the words of the Deity, and in the legal
portions of the Pentateuch, it has been thought best to use quotation
marks sparingly. Although the spelling of proper names in the English
Bible in many instances deviates somewhat from an accurate
representation of the Hebrew, it has nevertheless been deemed wise,
owing to the familiarity of Hebrew names in their usual English form,
generally to retain the current spelling.

In all externals this translation is especially adapted for use in

synagogue and school. The Keriat ha-Torah, or the reading of the
section from the Five Books of Moses, is the central feature of the
Synagogue service. The Pentateuch is divided into fifty-four
sections; beginning with the Sabbath following the Feast of
Tabernacles, the readings on the Sabbaths of the year are taken in
their order from the Five Books of Moses. The reading consists either
of the whole section or of a selected portion. There was a variant
custom according to which the reading of the Torah extended over a
period of three years instead of one year. However, the one year
cycle gradually superseded the three year cycle, and has become the
universal custom in the Synagogue.

The Pentateuchal readings are supplemented by readings from the

Prophets known as Haftarot. Readings from the third portion of the
Bible, though customary at one time, have now largely fallen into
disuse. The five small books known as the Five Megillot are given a
place in the Synagogue service in their entirety. On the feast of
Purim the book of Esther is read; the book of Lamentations is read on
Tish'ah be-Ab (Ninth of Ab), the fast-day observed in commemoration of
the destruction of Jerusalem; Song of Songs, Ruth, and Ecclesiastes
are read respectively on the Feast of Passover, the Feast of Weeks,
and the Feast of Tabernacles.

The sections of the Pentateuch as traditionally read on the Sabbath

are indicated, and a table gives all Scriptural readings, both on the
Sabbath and on feast days and fast days.

By the favor of a gracious Providence the present company of Editors

was permitted to finish the work which is now given to the public.
The final meeting in November, nineteen hundred and fifteen, was
closed with a prayer of thanks to God that the great task was
completed and that the group which during seven years had toiled
together was intact. Since that day two of our number have been
called to the academy on high, Solomon Schechter and Joseph Jacobs, be
their memory for a blessing. We grieve that it was not granted these
cherished colleagues to live to see the final fruition of their
labours; their wholehearted and devoted service is herewith recorded
in grateful appreciation. In all humility their co-workers submit
this version to the Jewish people in the confident hope that it will
aid them in the knowledge of the Word of God.

September 27, 1916.

In 1955 The Jewish Publication Society decided to issue a new edition
of its translation of the Holy Scriptures set in larger type and
produced in more attractive format than its edition of 1917.
Advantage was taken of this opportunity to correct a number of
typographical errors and to identify the haftarot and other Scriptural
readings. No changes were made in the text of the translation.

In 1995, Larry Nelson (Box 2083, Rialto, CA 92376), began to

transcribe this edition into computer format (ASCII). Advantage
was taken of this opportunity to correct a few typographical errors.
One change was made in the text of the translation. In Numbers 29:28
the word "single" was replaced with the word "sin." The context supports
this change. The haftarot and other Scriptural readings were not included
in this transcription. These can be obtained upon request by writing to
the above address. (Please include a self-addressed stamped envelop.)
The work was`completed,

November 27, 1996.