Эпиусион в Word Biblical Commentary
Jan. 25th, 2011 11:58 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
danuvius11 Give us today the eschatologicalg bread that will be ours in the future.
g. The difficult word ἐπιούσιον is rendered differently in the versions: it has cottidianum, “daily”; vg has supersubstantialem, “supersubstantial”; syc has (the equivalent of, as in the remaining variants) perpetuum, “perpetual”; sy(p)h necessarium, “necessary”; savenientem, “future”; and mae bo crastinum, “tomorrow’s.”
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον, “give to us today the eschatological bread that will be ours in the future.” In this petition, with the use of the first person plural pronoun, the prayer turns to the more specific needs of the dis ciples. Petitions of cosmic scope thus give way to the meeting of personal needs with the former as the basis of the latter. The much-debated interpretation of this passage depends on the difficult question of the meaning of the adjective ἐπιούσιον.
The following main proposals have been suggested. (1) ἐπιούσιον = ἐπὶ τὴν οὖσαν [from ἐπεῖναι] ἡμέραν, “for the present day.” In this interpretation, the petition is for the provision of the disciples’ daily needs for food. But this interpretation makes the petition unnecessarily redundant: “Give us our bread for the present day today.” Why are both ἐπιούσιον and σήμερον in the same sentence? (The question is even more difficult for Luke 11:3 with its τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, “for each day,” and the present δίδου, “keep giving.” Luke, however, seems to have understood ἐπιούσιον in a non-eschatological way, despite the degree of redundancy involved.) (2) ἐπιούσιον = (a) ἐπί plus οὐσία, “for existence.” The meaning in this case is clear enough: “give us today the bread necessary for our existence.” That is, give us today only the bread we need to survive. But again, the reason for the prayer is less than clear. Most important, the reason for the (on this view) redundant σήμερον, “today”—which is, moreover, in an emphatic position at the end of the sentence—is hardly apparent. (b) The combination of ἐπί and οὐσία, interpreted as supersubstantialis (as in the Vulgate; thus, lit., “the bread above the substance”), enabled many in the early Church (e.g., Jerome) to see the petition as a reference to the Eucharist. But this interpretation imports later concepts into the passage and does not fit the context well. (3) ἐπιούσιον = ἡ ἐπιοῦσα [from ἐπιέναι] ἡμέρα, for “the following day,” or “the coming day.” Here what is in view is either tomorrow’s ration of food and, in this case, the petition is “give us tomorrow’s ration of food today,” or today’s ration of bread prayed for the night before or early the same morning (thus Hemer, who shows that Matthew’s word can be related to the meaning of the commonly used substantive ἡ ἐπιοῦσα < ἐπιέναι). In this case the petition would amount to: “Give us bread for the day that is beginning.” Asking for tomorrow’s bread today, taken in the ordinary sense, stands in some tension with the exhortation not to be anxious about tomorrow (6:34, with reference to what there will be to eat!). To pray for bread for the day that is beginning makes good sense in itself, but on this view the emphatic σήμερον, “today,” again seems both unnecessary and difficult to explain. (4) ἐπιούσιον is derived from ἐπιέναι, “to come.” Bread for “the coming day” could be interpreted as bread for tomorr ow (or the future), i.e., the equivalent of the preceding option (and, according to Luz, etymologically the most probable; cf. Hultgren, who accepts this etymology but proposes that the adjective modifies “bread” rather than “day”—hence τὸν ἐπιούσιον ἄρτον, the meaning of which he paraphrases “our bread which comes upon us from you”). As some have argued who accept this view (esp. Jeremias; so too Brown, “Pater Noster”), the coming day in view could well be the day of the eschatological banquet (see on 8:11). Brown (“Pater Noster,” 306) also sees an allusion to the (messianic) miracle of manna on “the morrow” (Exod 16:4). The petition thus reflects an imminent eschatological expectation (cf. Harner, 84). Such an interpretation is in keeping with the content of the first three petitions, but what is more important, it is the only one to give an adequate understanding of the emphatic σήμερον,“today,” at the climactic end of the sentence. The disciples should pray for the experience of the eschatological blessing today, of the bread that brings the time of the eschaton, the messianic banquet.
The prayer thus asks for the present realization of the blessing of the eschaton. The prayer is nevertheless a prayer for bread. And there is a sense in which the bread (by synecdoche, “food”) we partake of daily is an anticipation of the eschatological banquet. This fourth petition, in moving from the cosmic to the particular, does not leave behind eschatological concerns. On the contrary, it looks for eschatological benefits in the present, and in this sense it is perhaps the most significant type of petition that the disciples can pray. At the same time, however, the fulfillment of present needs—even in so ordinary a thing as bread—is for the disciples anticipatory of the eschatological fulfillment of needs.
Hagner, D. A. (2002). Vol. 33A: Word Biblical Commentary : Matthew 1-13. Word Biblical Commentary (Страница 149). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
Лит-ра: Brown, R. E. “The Pater Noster as an Eschatological Prayer.” TS 22 (1961) 175–208 (reprinted in idem, New Testament Essays, 275–320). Dewailly, L.-M. “ ‘Donne-nous notre pain’: quel pain? Notes sur la quatrième demande du Pater.” RSPT 64 (1980) 561–88. Hemer, C. “ἐπιούσιος.” JSNT 22 (1984) 81–94. Hill, D. “ ‘Our Daily Bread’ (Matt 6.11) in the History of Exegesis.” IBS 5 (1983) 2–11. Hultgren, A. J. “The Bread Petition of the Lord’s Prayer.” In Christ and His Communities. FS R. H. Fuller, ed. A. J. Hultgren and B. Hall. ATR Supplementary Series 11. Cincinnati, OH: Forward Movement Publications, 1990. 41–54. Metzger, B. M. “How Many Times Does ‘EPIOUSIOS’ Occur outside the Lord’s Prayer?” ExpTim 69 (1957) 52–54. Orchard, B. “The Meaning of ton epiousion (Mt 6:11/Lk 11:3).” BTB (1973) 274–82. Yamauchi, E. M. “The ‘Daily Bread’ Motif in Antiquity.” WTJ 28 (1966) 145–56.
M. Dorneich, ed., Vater-Unser Bibliographie—The Lord’s Prayer, a Bibliography, Veröffentlichungen der Stiftung Oratio Dominica (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1982).
g. The difficult word ἐπιούσιον is rendered differently in the versions: it has cottidianum, “daily”; vg has supersubstantialem, “supersubstantial”; syc has (the equivalent of, as in the remaining variants) perpetuum, “perpetual”; sy(p)h necessarium, “necessary”; savenientem, “future”; and mae bo crastinum, “tomorrow’s.”
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον, “give to us today the eschatological bread that will be ours in the future.” In this petition, with the use of the first person plural pronoun, the prayer turns to the more specific needs of the dis ciples. Petitions of cosmic scope thus give way to the meeting of personal needs with the former as the basis of the latter. The much-debated interpretation of this passage depends on the difficult question of the meaning of the adjective ἐπιούσιον.
The following main proposals have been suggested. (1) ἐπιούσιον = ἐπὶ τὴν οὖσαν [from ἐπεῖναι] ἡμέραν, “for the present day.” In this interpretation, the petition is for the provision of the disciples’ daily needs for food. But this interpretation makes the petition unnecessarily redundant: “Give us our bread for the present day today.” Why are both ἐπιούσιον and σήμερον in the same sentence? (The question is even more difficult for Luke 11:3 with its τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, “for each day,” and the present δίδου, “keep giving.” Luke, however, seems to have understood ἐπιούσιον in a non-eschatological way, despite the degree of redundancy involved.) (2) ἐπιούσιον = (a) ἐπί plus οὐσία, “for existence.” The meaning in this case is clear enough: “give us today the bread necessary for our existence.” That is, give us today only the bread we need to survive. But again, the reason for the prayer is less than clear. Most important, the reason for the (on this view) redundant σήμερον, “today”—which is, moreover, in an emphatic position at the end of the sentence—is hardly apparent. (b) The combination of ἐπί and οὐσία, interpreted as supersubstantialis (as in the Vulgate; thus, lit., “the bread above the substance”), enabled many in the early Church (e.g., Jerome) to see the petition as a reference to the Eucharist. But this interpretation imports later concepts into the passage and does not fit the context well. (3) ἐπιούσιον = ἡ ἐπιοῦσα [from ἐπιέναι] ἡμέρα, for “the following day,” or “the coming day.” Here what is in view is either tomorrow’s ration of food and, in this case, the petition is “give us tomorrow’s ration of food today,” or today’s ration of bread prayed for the night before or early the same morning (thus Hemer, who shows that Matthew’s word can be related to the meaning of the commonly used substantive ἡ ἐπιοῦσα < ἐπιέναι). In this case the petition would amount to: “Give us bread for the day that is beginning.” Asking for tomorrow’s bread today, taken in the ordinary sense, stands in some tension with the exhortation not to be anxious about tomorrow (6:34, with reference to what there will be to eat!). To pray for bread for the day that is beginning makes good sense in itself, but on this view the emphatic σήμερον, “today,” again seems both unnecessary and difficult to explain. (4) ἐπιούσιον is derived from ἐπιέναι, “to come.” Bread for “the coming day” could be interpreted as bread for tomorr ow (or the future), i.e., the equivalent of the preceding option (and, according to Luz, etymologically the most probable; cf. Hultgren, who accepts this etymology but proposes that the adjective modifies “bread” rather than “day”—hence τὸν ἐπιούσιον ἄρτον, the meaning of which he paraphrases “our bread which comes upon us from you”). As some have argued who accept this view (esp. Jeremias; so too Brown, “Pater Noster”), the coming day in view could well be the day of the eschatological banquet (see on 8:11). Brown (“Pater Noster,” 306) also sees an allusion to the (messianic) miracle of manna on “the morrow” (Exod 16:4). The petition thus reflects an imminent eschatological expectation (cf. Harner, 84). Such an interpretation is in keeping with the content of the first three petitions, but what is more important, it is the only one to give an adequate understanding of the emphatic σήμερον,“today,” at the climactic end of the sentence. The disciples should pray for the experience of the eschatological blessing today, of the bread that brings the time of the eschaton, the messianic banquet.
The prayer thus asks for the present realization of the blessing of the eschaton. The prayer is nevertheless a prayer for bread. And there is a sense in which the bread (by synecdoche, “food”) we partake of daily is an anticipation of the eschatological banquet. This fourth petition, in moving from the cosmic to the particular, does not leave behind eschatological concerns. On the contrary, it looks for eschatological benefits in the present, and in this sense it is perhaps the most significant type of petition that the disciples can pray. At the same time, however, the fulfillment of present needs—even in so ordinary a thing as bread—is for the disciples anticipatory of the eschatological fulfillment of needs.
Hagner, D. A. (2002). Vol. 33A: Word Biblical Commentary : Matthew 1-13. Word Biblical Commentary (Страница 149). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
Лит-ра: Brown, R. E. “The Pater Noster as an Eschatological Prayer.” TS 22 (1961) 175–208 (reprinted in idem, New Testament Essays, 275–320). Dewailly, L.-M. “ ‘Donne-nous notre pain’: quel pain? Notes sur la quatrième demande du Pater.” RSPT 64 (1980) 561–88. Hemer, C. “ἐπιούσιος.” JSNT 22 (1984) 81–94. Hill, D. “ ‘Our Daily Bread’ (Matt 6.11) in the History of Exegesis.” IBS 5 (1983) 2–11. Hultgren, A. J. “The Bread Petition of the Lord’s Prayer.” In Christ and His Communities. FS R. H. Fuller, ed. A. J. Hultgren and B. Hall. ATR Supplementary Series 11. Cincinnati, OH: Forward Movement Publications, 1990. 41–54. Metzger, B. M. “How Many Times Does ‘EPIOUSIOS’ Occur outside the Lord’s Prayer?” ExpTim 69 (1957) 52–54. Orchard, B. “The Meaning of ton epiousion (Mt 6:11/Lk 11:3).” BTB (1973) 274–82. Yamauchi, E. M. “The ‘Daily Bread’ Motif in Antiquity.” WTJ 28 (1966) 145–56.
M. Dorneich, ed., Vater-Unser Bibliographie—The Lord’s Prayer, a Bibliography, Veröffentlichungen der Stiftung Oratio Dominica (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1982).
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 09:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 09:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 10:21 am (UTC)Тем более, что мы имеем дело с неологизмом, единственным в своем роде.
Напрягает "сегодня", потому что потом идет опять семеион. Получается тавтология. (причем, напрянает не только WBC).
Эсхатологический хлеб (грядущий хлеб) - это также возможные перевод. Он хорошо вписывается в семантическое поле хлеба небесного, маны, которая была прообразом и т.д.
Благодаря вчерашней дискуссии и ночной бессоннице :) я склоняюсь к мысли, что здесь аутентично прочитывается два смысла:
1)дай нам хлеб, достаточный на этот день. (Довлеет дневи злоба его)
2) дай нам хлеб грядущий (это прямой перевод "еп+эрхомай", следующий за.) (Не буду больше пить от виноградной лозы, пока не окажусь в царствии небесном, я это уже цитировал)
Манна была буквально хлебом небесным и прообразом БУДУЩЕГО литургического тела Христова. При этом она давалась только на этот один день. Оба смысла прочитываются уже из ВЗ. Оба смысла вложены в эпиусиос.
Из словаря Гурина-Дворецкого
II ἔπ-ειμι 1) (к чему-л.) идти, подходить, приближаться
no subject
Date: 2011-01-25 08:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 08:48 am (UTC)Быстрый поиск дал такой ответ.
1. Слово в НЗ, где должна быть элизия, но ее нет:
Словарь Дворецкого
ἐπι-εικής 2
1) надлежащий, умеренный
Номера Стронга фиксируют 5 случаев употребления этого слова в разных формах.
http://strongsnumbers.com/greek/1933.htm
Например, Иаков 3,17.
http://concordance.biblos.com/epieike_s.htm
Подчеркиваю еще раз: наш эпиусиос является составным неологизмом, который, очевидно, придумал человек иудейской ментальности, от которого не стоит требовать пуризма в греческой грамматике. Гипотетически этимология епи+усия (быть) не может быть категорически исключена (серьезные словари не исключают).
Тем более что, описывая общие фонетические законы греческого сквозь века и эпохи, так сказать, наш Соболевский говорит: "элизия применяется не всегда", параграф 38.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 09:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 09:25 am (UTC)Словарь Дворецкого
I ἐπί-ορκος 2
1) (о клятве) ложный
хиатус есть, ί относится к приставке, а не к корню - элизии нет.
Тимофею 1,10 "клятвопреступников" (по синодальному)
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 09:48 am (UTC)Мне производное от эЙми все равно кажется единственно предпочтительным, а симерон как раз и замещает имеру в традиционном сочетании для Писания "и эпиуса имера". Так что я остаюсь пока при своем мнении и не разделяю затруднений комментаторов в употреблении "днесь".
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 12:54 pm (UTC)Ну, поскольку у меня по греческому двойка :), то это слишком сложное для меня задание, если вообще такой прецедент есть в НЗ.
Хотя я вас и не убедил, так хоть сам разобрался.
Мой финальный вывод:
1)Этимология к эрхомай наиболее вероятная, но не единственная.
2)В Нагорной проповеди упакованы оба смысла: сегодня дай нам хлеба, достаточно, чтобы прожить этот день + дай нам уже сегодня будущий/ эсхатологический хлеб.
3)Для литургической практики лучше оставить как есть. Хлеб наш насущный дай нам днесь.
4) Если бы я переводил этот отрывок, я бы перевел: "хлеб наш грядущий" и дал бы ссылку на другие варианты.
Переводов должно быть много и разных.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 09:03 am (UTC)Блас-Дебрунер говорит о тенденции к большей изоляции отдельных слов, т.е. к меньшей строгости в соблюдении элизии.
Вывод: эпи+усиос вполне может восходить к глаголу быть, а не идти.
§§17-19
I n line with the scribal tendency of the
period towards greater isolation of individual
words, there is little to note regarding elimination
of hiatus by elision or crasis in the NT MSS.
И далее
The NT MSS
never indicate elision in nominal and verbal
forms, seldom in pronouns, frequently in the most
common particles, customarily in prepositions in
current formulae and with following pronouns.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-26 09:41 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-31 05:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-01-31 06:15 pm (UTC)