The Yahuds receive no stranger into their community; circumcision is the law of their prophet, not that of others. They say also that a prophet is always living and present, to be the propagator of the law which is contained in the sacred book. _Abhî Chand_, having translated a part of the Mosaic book, the author of this work revised it with Sarmad; they corrected it completely, affixed their mark to it, so that it became a correct copy, from which is the following:

The Dabistan gives here a Persian translation of the Genesis, from the beginning to chapter VI, verse 8; at the end of which the author says that this is the only portion of the sacred book of the Jews which he had an opportunity of examining. According to Eichhorn (see Einleitung in das alte Testament, 4th edit., vol. II. p. 329) the five books of Moses were translated into Persian by the rabbi Jacob, son of Joseph, after the ninth century; the translation contained in the Dabistan is said to have been executed by Abhi Chand; we cannot say whether it was made from the Hebrew original, or from the Arabic, or any other language. We are informed by the baron Hammer-Purgstall (see Gemaldesaal moslimisher Herrsher, p. 57) that Werka ben Nafil, a cousin of Khadija, Muhammed’s wife, and a Christian priest, translated the Old and New Testament from the Hebrew into Arabic; this translation appears however to have been but little known. Eichhorn says (loco citato, p. 231), that the first certain traces of a translation of the Hebrew sacred books into Arabic are to be found in the tenth century. Pocock mentions (pp. 34, 361) Sâadias, a learned Jew, who lived from 892 to 941 A. D., as translator of all the books of the Old Testament into Arabic; and another Jew (not named) who made a version of the book of Kings into the same language.

The Dabistán, Volume 2 (of 3) — Part 146

The Persian translation of the fragment under our consideration was revised by the author of the Dabistan, and by Sarmed, who was a Jew and a Rabbin, converted to Muhammedism, most probably in the first half of the seventeenth century. As it was undoubtedly executed from another original copy than that which had served to the translators in Europe, it appeared interesting enough to examine whether the Persian version of the Dabistan differs in any material point from the translations known in Europe. For that purpose I have consulted the following copies of the Bible:

The Dabistán, Volume 2 (of 3) — Part 146